.... I feel for you.... I’m very hard of hearing (70% left. 30% right. that was 8 years ago) with lots of ringing and crickets chirping etc... Videos with background music/effects makes it tuff also.... Good Luck... hope other things go well for you...
Chateau Gaillard was the subject of one of the best burns (or insults) which ever passed between two medieval-era monarchs. King Richard I of England, and King Phillip II of France, were bitter enemies by the time of the building of Chateau Gaillard. Richard blamed Phillip for the failure of the Third Crusade to retake Jerusalem from Saladin, in 1189-92, when Phillip abandoned the crusade after the taking of Acre. Phillip then conspired with Richard's brother, the future King John, to usurp the throne after Richard was captured and held prisoner by the Holy Roman Emperor, Henry VI.There was little love lost between Richard and Phillip, and after Richard's release, he set about making Phillip pay dearly for his treachery. Chateau Gaillard was just such an affront to Phillip's soveriegnty, as well as constituting a definite strategic threat to Phillip's hold on France, itself. Phillip vowed to take Chateau Gaillard from Richard, boasting, *_If it's walls were made of iron, still I would take it._* To which Richard famously replied, *_If it's walls were made of butter, still I would hold it._* It was, however, Phillip who had the last laugh, when he captured Chateau Gaillard from Richard's successor, the hapless King John, in 1204.
Keith Tiberius thanks for that. I worked with a conservation project nearby to protect the rare, beautiful Rouen violet which only grows on the inland chalk cliffs along the meanders of the Seine. There’s a tragic codicil. When the castle was under siege the English defenders expelled the civilian population to make their food supplies last longer. However the French refused to let them cross their lines as a counter to that ploy. Both sides looked on as the civilians slowly starved and died before their eyes. A tale I suppose of the suffering of ordinary people through the wars of vain and foolish men.
Very interesting post Keith , i enjoyed reading that . King John was a naughty boy wasn't he , he was like an adult child , a spoilt brat, he turned the whole of England against him in the end , the ordinary people and the barons /lords too , they even invited the French come over to England & fight with them against king John .. Did you know Richard lion heart only spent something like 6 months in England, he even offered to sell London for the right price... he wanted more money to carry on fighting in the holy land.. Bloody Normans 🤗
Perhaps the best analogy to castles back then (military wise) would be modern aircraft carriers, since they act as deterrents, can control a wide area, project your power and work defensively as well. We could even go further and say that they are indeed modern carriers, for most of them actually are their navies' flagships, and host the foremost naval officials.
In stronghold crusader I got so good at planning them that I could build perfectly round castles while keeping my enemies in check without ever pausing the game. I loved that game.
yeah,the original stronghold and stronghold crusader was really good at what it did,but i mostly made castles on hills so i don't have to desing a really good one :D,the good thing about it is you can actually buy the HD version on steam
Berk Hasan döner I liked to build a line of catapult towers as far out as possible, to harass the enemies supply. For some reason they hardly ever attacked my towers, but ran past them attacking my castle instead, thereby being exposed to attacks from all sides. AI LOL.
Where I live in Ireland the countryside is littered with motte and bailey castles in various states of ruin although one was redone on the inside with plasterboard and flooring and is someones house. I've never been inside but i'm told its nice. The closest to me only has a single standing wall but is about 4 stories high.
Sergeants, medieval sergeants were basically soldiers but not nobility, plebs who have dedicated their lives to military pursuit, and accompanied nobles.
Surely you meant to say that the fact that everyone instantly declares war on you if there's a coalition against you is the worst thing since blobbing takes up ages
I'm always impressed and a little surprised by the perspective you take in these videos. However, some images would be nice. In this case, pictures of what the different levels of castle looked like would have helped. I had to frequently pause the video to look them up. It interrupts the flow of the lesson.
you might want to look forward to the video on Friday. Currently I don't have the funds to visit castles and other objects to take pictures myself. For this video I actually tried for the first time to find a proper picture of one castle, but couldn't find one with a proper license in 5 minutes, so I skipped it.
You're being very honest about using images. I don't think most people would bother. The websites for the castles, for instance, should be pleased if you used their images as it promotes awareness of their 'product.' Another option might be to process the image via a Photoshop filter (or any art program these days) into a line drawing or related form. To be clear, I'm of the 'better to ask for forgiveness than permission side of things, within reason. ;-) I'm also fairly certain that many images for such old edifices have long expired their copyright. I suppose a third option would be a simple pictograph that illustrates the concept of 'big castle,' etc, but that's more work.
well, not only about images. But it is less about honesty in this case and more about: not risking 20.75 hours of work, due to some potential copyright infringements. I assume that some laws etc. may be more enforced in the future. I had a law class on digital photography and the professor in charge noted that in Austria and Germany it is common to use crawlers searching for watermarked photos, and we are talking about "invisible" marked once. This also included CV photos that were used online, although the person only got rights to use them for CVs.... the European Union / Europe was weak fair use rights, as a friend lately noted "in Europe we never really abandoned the idea to use copyright as a tool for potential censorship"...
I see your point, though to play devil's advocate, images aggressively protected under copyright typically belong to big media / corporations. 12th century castles are probably safe. ;-)
Really appreciate explaining the numbers involved in construction, maintaining, and also garrison of castles. Not often is it discussed how large a garrison force actually was. Keep it up!
This was a great video. You point out one important fact about castles. They symbolised power and a Lord had a castle. They could be quite elegant or be more basic. But castles had to built for defence and often have sophisticated defences. Often, you avoided attacks against castles if possible. Mass battles were avoided and most campaigns included at least one siege, either brief or protracted. And the garrison could vary from one castle to another.
another well done. to those who criticize pronunciation. If your German is better than his English then please continue to criticize if you really feel the need to be petty.
7:45 the yearly costs of garrison were visually shown to be 3400, when they were 700. So there was one error in the visualization. Otherwise it's really beneficial to see the costs visualized.
This was great! Love the topic and the facts presented. The cost of logistics and construction in the medieval and ancient times is always very important to understanding history.
Castles are great, I'm fortunate enough to live in the country with the most castles per square mile in the world so it's great to learn a bit more about them.
Hey, Military History Visualized. I have only started watching your channel a couple of weeks ago and was immediately in love. I am a very visual learner and have a passion for both History and Military stuff. This channel combines these things perfectly. I really like how well researched your videos are, you never "talk out of your ass" like some other would-be experts that you sadly find too often on youtube. Some of my favourite episodes were your ones on operation barabarossa. You really opened my eyes about how the Germans were not stopped by General Winter, a notion that had never occurred to me before. The way you showed that going for Kiev instead of moscow was actually the best idea was also really interesting and enlightening. One of my chief interests and I suspect also of many others is the Napoleonic era. I was wondering if you could something like you did about operation Barbarossa but for Napoleon's invasion of Russia. Maybe you could explain why this one failed or how it could have been avoided. Anyways I love your channel and it is a great resource for my 15 year old nerd brain to learn more about military history. I also like that you (due to being Austrian) can pronounce all the german words (and also often from other languages) correctly, something few youtubers can do and that is often annoying to a german speaker like me. I am swiss by the way. Grüezi! Anyways, Ich liebe diesen Kanal und werde definitiv weiterhin zuschauen. I
I got a PDF downloaded of the book "Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades" thanks to this video... thanks mang. Got some new reading material now. :DDD
I came across in art history where the professor indicated some that gave a hint of the time. Within a photo she pointed out to us the residency in the fort or castle had large glass windows,... during a time when there were definitely raiding and pillaging. It was explained not every place experienced the same amount of chaos or had it to occur all the time and there was affluence and flourishing during that dark age/medieval era contrary to what our modern perspective has of the time.
To expand on Herr Lambrecht´s comment: Lets take a number, thirty-five, and translate it into German. It is _fünf-und-dreißig_. _Fünf_ stands for five, and _dreißig_ for thirty (_drei_ means three) So that way you can see how it is quite simple to mix stuff up, specially with bigger numbers.
If you can get to Dover Castle there has been an attempt to show how the state rooms would have looked originally. This was built by the King to impress visitors.
Not sure if it sounds like a `castle` but recently found out about `Fort Drum` (El Fraile Island) made in 1906,i believe it is a great example how these kind of principles can be combined with water,a lot of water. :) Great video. `
The Krak did not fall quickly. It fell due to a trick. The hole story of the surrender of the castle is quite fun. Good video, in particular on the costs!
Here's a Castle Question I'd like to see: If you had to build a modern castle today using all of the features of Medieval castles taking into account things like modern weapons how would you do it? What's the best structure for say a homestead and farm?
Castles are an easy target for even light artillery and grenades. Concealed mg positions with underground shelters, mined areas and an early warning system with infra red motion sensors might be better for a homestead. If more resources are available any counter artillery might be good either inform of an own artillery or, more modern, a small drone with an explosive payload.
Considering how long it took to build a stone castle, I wonder if it was common practice to first build a simple wooden castle (or at least wooden defensive walls) on the site for temporary protection of the workers/materials/supplies.
Krak Des Chevaliers was probably the greatest castle ever created. It was large, effective, very intimidating, and it was never taken by force. The Mamulk Sultan Bybars had to trick the garrison into surrendering with a forged letter.
castles would usually have their own basic breweries I think, to offset the lack of a clean water supply they could turn grey water into weak alcohol. but maybe this was less common than I thought
i am slightly critical of the garrison numbers: you seem to largely look at british and french numbers. In 'Germany' there was one castle to every 450 people or so, so a garrison or even a population of 2000 people is extremely rare. where in Brittain we are talking about maybe 200 castles all told, in 'germany' we are talking about 20.000. In Holland (proper) we are talking about 117 castles, some of which only really represented a tower surrounded by a moat. a four room castle like Dever in Lisse was pretty common for a knightly 'house' castles are often defined as defensible residence and centre of local government. this does not have to be a huge fortress to be 'crenelated' or seen as a castle back then. Most castles i have seen would struggle to provide shelter for 2000 (!) people long term, even larger ones like Warwick, and definitely the Wartburg, for instance, and i wonder what the source really says, it might be the troops they might be able to deliver for war, for instance, which does not represent an actual garrison or permanent billeting of troops. Most castles must have had populations of about 10-20 maybe.
i'd say overlord just allowed more margin for error, whilst market garden's main objective (keeping the Rhein-crossing intact) was too chance-y; every bridge along the way was a coinflip that, if unsuccesful, would negatively modify the final diceroll for the paratroops in arnhem. However from a strategic standpoint i think Market Garden was at least not a total failure: Firstly i think for all the dutch people that were liberated along the way by the ground forces, would call this a success in it's own right, then there's the morale boost for all the allied troops if you let them know high command is doing everything it can to 'end the war by christmas' and they need you (the soldier) to help do your part, even if you're fighting in france, or Italy. thirdly: german command had to commit quite a few reinforcements, including armoured divisions, to get the paratroops at Arnhem away from the bridge, not to mention afterwards, when they had to maintain defensive positions of all the other (even potential) points for crossing an army. This means all the other operations would therefor encounter less heavy resistance than if Market Garden never took place. Lastly; tying in with my last point: The allies forced germany to widen their defensive lines, meaning that germany will have to make sacrifices to Anti-air defences on either strategic level (lessen the depth of your AA defences to commit them near the front to repel ground attack planes, supporting allied ground forces, allowing allied bombing of german factories etc. to be more succesful) or on the tactical level (instead of redirecting AA to the frontlines, you just use the number you already had on the front, but they have to try and cover a lot more airspace than before, spreading them too thin to be anywhere near as effective at repelling ground attack planes) This is just from the top of my head, mind you; I imagine 'Military History Visualized" would have a lot more to say about this, maybe even correcting me on certain things, so i would still watch a video like the one you proposed.
At around 8:19 I was wondering about the garrison... Where are all the "maintenance" personnel (cooks, stable-boys and whatever a "cleaning lady" is in medieval terms) and shouldn't they get paid something too, increasing the total maintenance costs? As always, great video! Amazing how you constantly seem to find the type of topics of which i immediately think "yeah, I've always wondered about that". :)
> "yeah, I've always wondered about that". :) that is my approach for quite some of my videos. Had an article about building costs for a castle than I realized while reading I have no clue how a castle is built started working on that, but didn't have enough data. Stopped, made another video and a few weeks later I took a different look at castles. thanks. About the other personnel, I don't know, but I assume that their cost was minor and they would also produce stuff and the feudal system. Also the porter also had a janitor function if I am not mistaken.
In those days, you could pay your taxes with labour. So the staff of the castle was mostly not permanent and did not live inside the castle. Only a few very big castles in Europe had permanent staff (castles of kings).
One of the reasons to build a castle was to have an oubliette. A recent show I watched said almost every single castle has one but they like to keep that quiet due to tourism and being P.C.. Someone actually went all over the place investigating castles and was quite shocked to learn that they most all had one. It's just a tiny area hidden away to toss prisoners into and forget about. Slowly starve a personal enemy to death. Hopefully one which they can claim titles from.
I don't think that was a reason to build a castle. That would be a quite an overkill. Also, who does keep quiet about it and what does this have to do with P.C.? In all the castles near my hometown (there are dozens of castles), there are guided tours for the oubliettes and dungeons in which the tourists and visitors get to see it along with torture chambers and the various kinds of cells.
I have to wonder what the source is of all this interesting detail on the expenses and income that really shows what kind of situations people were in. Thanks again for sharing.
Quality work, as it is customary of yours. A cool castle that I think it is worth mentioning is Guédelon Castle. Why is it important? Well, because it is not finished yet. It is perhaps the world's biggest archaeological experiment. The castle is being built exclusively using middle ages construction techniques. Wikipedia has a great gallery of images where you can appreciate the castle being built over the years: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gu%C3%A9delon_Castle
The most important and dangerous element of ancient and Dark Age Castles is said to have been their aviaries. Anyone who's seen a certain Battlefield 1 scene probably understands why.
Yeah it would be nice to hear something about the battles of the Baltic and Finnic tribes against the Teutons. In particularly why the natives ultimately lost. I always assumed it was because the Teutons had stone castles and the locals had wood forts as there are many accounts of the locals outmatching the knights on the battle field just to then fail at their fortification (Riga in particular). Now I wonder if it was because the Baltic had inferior fortification building technology or less siege experience or if the tech was indeed on par and it came down to resources with Teutons being able to afford better wood forts and/or more stone forts. So many questions and so little material about that era around.
Love how little Wales is the Castle capital of the world. Germans, French and English all have impressive castles.. But if you want to tour medieval castles in good condition, Wales is the place to go
Apparently english longbow archers were paid 3 shillings per day, which was about three times more than a peasant could hope for. To give more or less of an idea of how much that money was. Those 700 pound cost of running a castle each day is equivalent pay for 38 longbowmen or other such well paid non-nobility soldiers. Edit: Oh, and look, the garrison had 37 people, i hadn't gotten that far in the video, but how's that calculation, huh? probably the knights earned more than 3 shillings, but the others earned less.
It would be nice to see a separate video about fortifications in Russian area in middle ages. There was no exact european castles, but rather slightly different constructions - кремль, город and гуляй-город for example. The word "город", which is being used this days to refer a city, truly means "fortification". Also, monasteries and churches were always built as forts basically, and were able to withstand sieges.
Sergeants are commoners who pay tribute to their Lord by serving them personally instead of paying with gold or produce. For example, you could pay tribute by working a certain number of days as castle guard, like the sergeants mentioned in this video.
+velikiradojica not always - sergeant means servant. Many nobles were servants of their overlords or the monarch, such as the Gentleman of the Stool, a very important person in medieval England as he would be alone with the King, which was a very rare event, so you could have an influence greater than you actual rank.
Professional, career soldiers, yes; standardized and specialized, not so much. They'd be equipped as well as their lord could afford. Maybe as well equipped as knights in some cases, but probably without so much expensive decoration. Idk from facts but I assume training would vary greatly by region, decade, economics, and the traditions and peculiarities of the house they served.
Yes, they had to be centres of business to some degree just as much as military to keep up the running costs. I seem to remember this could be an early source of tension with the Catholic church in England as there was competition for markets (especially wool markets) with monasteries.
Makes sense that a garrisoned castle could also support a market. They were usually built in centralized locations. I imagine they could exact a small toll in return for protecting merchants and their goods when they had nothing else to do.
"Castles were bases for offensive operations" but on the other hand "castles was expensive so few rulers could both afford a huge field army and a strong castle".
I'd like to see a video about medieval castles and warfare in eastern Europe (ie. Bysantium, Poland and the Kievan Rus), India and east Asia in the future.
Very interesting video. For castle cost estimations there is a very unlikely source in the acts of a litigation process between two archbishops in Spain in 1526-1527. The acts can be found here: books.google.es/books/about/Las_fortalezas_de_la_mitra_compostelana.html?id=xtWkAAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y&hl=es The origin of the feud was the destruction as many as about (minimum) 100-140 fortresses, towers and similar buildings during a revolution that took place in 1467-1469 in Galicia, North West Spain. Some of these fortresses belonged to the Compostela Archbishopy and many years later, a new archbishop claimed his predecessor for not reconstructing or repairing the depleted buildings, so a litigation started, witnesses were called, and construction masters evaluated the costs of rebuilding the castles. The acts were preserved and when they were rediscovered in the early 20th century they gave a glimpse of what actually happened on what was the long forgotten "Guerra Irmandiña" or "Brotherhood War".
Woah, there's some misleading graphics in here: the upkeep cost of 700 pounds per year is shown as being 3.3 times the size of an income of 1000 pounds. I'm sure it's a simple mistake but it might be worth putting a note up.
The Motte ( mound ) was the original part , did a moat or defensive ditches & pile the earth in the middle until its high enough & then build a fort on top , from wood . Then begin building in stone using the wooden surround as a protective curtain/ shield from angry locals shooting arrows at you , when its finished pull the pointless original wooden surround down & use for firewood. Over time the castle on the mound would be enlarged, a stone gatehouse added & the 'baily' would have the church, feasting hall , stables etc . Thst was the way the first Norman lords began, but over the next few 100 years things like round turrets were rebuilt as square towers, all kinds of changes, remodelled over the centuries. In England many of the castles are ruins, not because of bad repairs, but most are down to Cromwells men filling them with gunpowder and blowing them up, because during our civil war in the 1600s many royalists used them as defensive sanctuaries, the 'roundheads' ( Cromwell's men) spent years or months besieging the castles , so each time they captured one they would do their best to destroy the castle, easier said than done, they never completely destroyed them but they made them uninhabitable.
You talked a lot about the cost of building and maintaining a castle. How about the financial benefits like tolls and taxes. Are they already included in the average income shown at 8:00 ?
So, roughly, the "Royal" income is 50x that of a baroni. If we consider the "Royal" income to be the largest administrative units, and the baroni the lowest administrative area, we could compare the income of a national government to that of a municipality. The federal gov of Canada income is ~300 billion $. That of a city of ~180k people (in a country of ~37 millions) is ~300 millions (or 1/10 of the biggest admin unit). Many municipitalies have something closer to ~30 millions (1/100). From that napkin calculation, it seems to be that the proportional incomes of large admin units (nation govs, royals) to the smallests (baronies, municipalities) is somewhat constant through time.
Niccolo Macchiavelli argues in book 2 of his book Discorsi (p. 347 in my Dutch translation) that castles cause more damage than they give help. I think it could be interesting for you to check it out. His plea is based on internal politics and internal military reasons and is of a much later date than your film takes a look at. This comment is because of that not a retorsion of your film, but an addition. Hope you will appreciate it.
thx, I remember reading about it ages ago, probably more than 10 years. Yeah, at his time the importance of castles has past if I am not mistaken, but I will keep it in mind when doing future videos on more modern fortifications.
In the edition I have, the book 2 ends on page 300, so you are likely to be referring to page 247. Anyway, you must take into account that when Machiavelli wrote about castles, artillery had already rendered them useless. Dragging huge cannons was a chore, but once they were in place, they could bring walls down in a matter of hours. The bastions were yet to be invented. Castles are important because they drag a lot of troops into a long siege. This denies the chance of a surprise attack, give time to your lord summon troops from other counties (remember there was no professional standing army), prevents the enemy going further into your territory without committing troops to sieges (if they did they would be without supply, news, reinforcements, etc... and prone to be encircled) and dissuade adversaries with less manpower than you to attack in the first place. Only those rich in terms of both money and men could gamble in the siege lottery. Note that Machiavelli also wrote about castles in other books in a more political and less militaristic terms. He was a bold enthusiast of regular offensive infantry fighting with high moral and that required a lord to be fair, even if strict.
Cannons didn't end the middle ages(or castles). They were in fact a large part of the late middle ages. It helped that that most were best described as explosive battering rams until the Renaissance. It wasn't even cannons that finally took Constantinople(against popular conception), but an idiot who forgot to lock a side gate.
Dude, nothing changes instantly. Cannons didn't swipe castles and ends the age as the time they come, they just opened the gate to the end of the castle age, like other factors. Don't forget that there were castles even in the end of the 19th century, like cannon was in the late medieval. And if you really believe the shit about the Fall of Constantinople, you've never seen the situation of the Walls around the old Istanbul then...
Cemre Ömer Ayna I did not say that cannons wiped away castles. I said that they changed their design. They switched from tall thin walls to short deap sloped walls supported by earthenworks. Artillery peices where Incorporated into castles and that drastically changed thier arrangement as there was now an emphasis on creating well positioned gun emplacements and robing attackers of good spots for their own artillery. There was also a growing focus on defense in depth and the creation of killing fields through overlapping fire. Overall castles became much more complex and expensive and their intended role changed. That is why it would be better to cover late medieval and Renaissance fortifications in a separate video.
![ปฏิเสธไม่ไหว (Crush on you) - LIPTA feat. No One Else [TEASER MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VC689EgdSIw/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks you so much for putting subtitles. I'm deaf, and it helps me a lot.
you are welcome, but those are actually provided by my fans, cause I don't have time to add subtitles myself.
Do you have a hearing aid as I have a deaf friend and she’s got a hearing aid
.... I feel for you.... I’m very hard of hearing (70% left. 30% right. that was 8 years ago) with lots of ringing and crickets chirping etc... Videos with background music/effects makes it tuff also.... Good Luck... hope other things go well for you...
Chateau Gaillard was the subject of one of the best burns (or insults) which ever passed between two medieval-era monarchs. King Richard I of England, and King Phillip II of France, were bitter enemies by the time of the building of Chateau Gaillard. Richard blamed Phillip for the failure of the Third Crusade to retake Jerusalem from Saladin, in 1189-92, when Phillip abandoned the crusade after the taking of Acre. Phillip then conspired with Richard's brother, the future King John, to usurp the throne after Richard was captured and held prisoner by the Holy Roman Emperor, Henry VI.There was little love lost between Richard and Phillip, and after Richard's release, he set about making Phillip pay dearly for his treachery. Chateau Gaillard was just such an affront to Phillip's soveriegnty, as well as constituting a definite strategic threat to Phillip's hold on France, itself. Phillip vowed to take Chateau Gaillard from Richard, boasting, *_If it's walls were made of iron, still I would take it._* To which Richard famously replied, *_If it's walls were made of butter, still I would hold it._*
It was, however, Phillip who had the last laugh, when he captured Chateau Gaillard from Richard's successor, the hapless King John, in 1204.
Keith Tiberius thanks for that. I worked with a conservation project nearby to protect the rare, beautiful Rouen violet which only grows on the inland chalk cliffs along the meanders of the Seine.
There’s a tragic codicil. When the castle was under siege the English defenders expelled the civilian population to make their food supplies last longer. However the French refused to let them cross their lines as a counter to that ploy.
Both sides looked on as the civilians slowly starved and died before their eyes.
A tale I suppose of the suffering of ordinary people through the wars of vain and foolish men.
Dean Morrison
It was a pretty common story since the beginning of siege warfare. A similar thing happened when Julius Caesar besieged Alesia.
Richard wrote (at least is credited with writing) a pretty good song while in captivity too
Very interesting post Keith , i enjoyed reading that .
King John was a naughty boy wasn't he , he was like an adult child , a spoilt brat, he turned the whole of England against him in the end , the ordinary people and the barons /lords too , they even invited the French come over to England & fight with them against king John ..
Did you know Richard lion heart only spent something like 6 months in England, he even offered to sell London for the right price... he wanted more money to carry on fighting in the holy land..
Bloody Normans 🤗
king John more like king begone
Perhaps the best analogy to castles back then (military wise) would be modern aircraft carriers, since they act as deterrents, can control a wide area, project your power and work defensively as well.
We could even go further and say that they are indeed modern carriers, for most of them actually are their navies' flagships, and host the foremost naval officials.
Imagine if medieval castles could move...
A strange analogy, but I do get what you mean,.
@@SinerAthin they made a movie with something like that, was horrible lol. Anyways im into necromancy so i figured id revive this dead post.
This makes me want to play Crusader Kings 2 again :-)
Beware the atztec!
the aztec,pffft inbred french ruler horde as your vassals are much worse
In stronghold crusader I got so good at planning them that I could build perfectly round castles while keeping my enemies in check without ever pausing the game. I loved that game.
yeah,the original stronghold and stronghold crusader was really good at what it did,but i mostly made castles on hills so i don't have to desing a really good one :D,the good thing about it is you can actually buy the HD version on steam
Berk Hasan döner
I liked to build a line of catapult towers as far out as possible, to harass the enemies supply. For some reason they hardly ever attacked my towers, but ran past them attacking my castle instead, thereby being exposed to attacks from all sides. AI LOL.
Where I live in Ireland the countryside is littered with motte and bailey castles in various states of ruin although one was redone on the inside with plasterboard and flooring and is someones house. I've never been inside but i'm told its nice. The closest to me only has a single standing wall but is about 4 stories high.
This is a scheduled publication, hopefully it works out. This also means that comments etc. will be delayed. Enjoy!
What are Sarjents
It is very informative and interesting.
Make more of it. About Medieveal Period.
Sergeants, medieval sergeants were basically soldiers but not nobility, plebs who have dedicated their lives to military pursuit, and accompanied nobles.
Surely you meant to say that the fact that everyone instantly declares war on you if there's a coalition against you is the worst thing since blobbing takes up ages
Ive got to say that as a welsh man im impressed with your pronunciation of Rhuddlan castle not too far off at all.
I must say, you Welsh have an interesting way of naming things. Hard to pronounce, but the names look awesome!
thx, it was by accident :)
likewise :)
You can do binge drinking on your videos: One drink for every furdermore you say
you should check my earlier videos, although that is probably suicide with that approach, back then I hadn't figured out "additionally, " yet :D
I did :)! I was already wondering that you would not say it that often anymore.
I'm always impressed and a little surprised by the perspective you take in these videos. However, some images would be nice. In this case, pictures of what the different levels of castle looked like would have helped. I had to frequently pause the video to look them up. It interrupts the flow of the lesson.
you might want to look forward to the video on Friday. Currently I don't have the funds to visit castles and other objects to take pictures myself. For this video I actually tried for the first time to find a proper picture of one castle, but couldn't find one with a proper license in 5 minutes, so I skipped it.
You're being very honest about using images. I don't think most people would bother. The websites for the castles, for instance, should be pleased if you used their images as it promotes awareness of their 'product.' Another option might be to process the image via a Photoshop filter (or any art program these days) into a line drawing or related form. To be clear, I'm of the 'better to ask for forgiveness than permission side of things, within reason. ;-) I'm also fairly certain that many images for such old edifices have long expired their copyright. I suppose a third option would be a simple pictograph that illustrates the concept of 'big castle,' etc, but that's more work.
well, not only about images. But it is less about honesty in this case and more about: not risking 20.75 hours of work, due to some potential copyright infringements. I assume that some laws etc. may be more enforced in the future. I had a law class on digital photography and the professor in charge noted that in Austria and Germany it is common to use crawlers searching for watermarked photos, and we are talking about "invisible" marked once. This also included CV photos that were used online, although the person only got rights to use them for CVs....
the European Union / Europe was weak fair use rights, as a friend lately noted "in Europe we never really abandoned the idea to use copyright as a tool for potential censorship"...
I see your point, though to play devil's advocate, images aggressively protected under copyright typically belong to big media / corporations. 12th century castles are probably safe. ;-)
Well, he is very good at it and doing it at the academic level for free. Support him please.
Massively Fortified Erections. Best band name ever!
+kefkaZZZ lol
Really appreciate explaining the numbers involved in construction, maintaining, and also garrison of castles. Not often is it discussed how large a garrison force actually was. Keep it up!
This was a great video. You point out one important fact about castles. They symbolised power and a Lord had a castle. They could be quite elegant or be more basic. But castles had to built for defence and often have sophisticated defences. Often, you avoided attacks against castles if possible. Mass battles were avoided and most campaigns included at least one siege, either brief or protracted. And the garrison could vary from one castle to another.
One doesn't simply make a LOTR reference....
One does not simply use a contraction when quoting Boromir.
Two does complicatedly run out of Gondor.
No to raise stability you need about 100 admin power +/- any modifiers.
This is awesome! I've never seen this kind of information in a condensed video. Keep at it.
another well done. to those who criticize pronunciation. If your German is better than his English then please continue to criticize if you really feel the need to be petty.
7:45 the yearly costs of garrison were visually shown to be 3400, when they were 700. So there was one error in the visualization. Otherwise it's really beneficial to see the costs visualized.
This was great! Love the topic and the facts presented. The cost of logistics and construction in the medieval and ancient times is always very important to understanding history.
Another excellent video, sir. Thank you so much!
You're doing a great job with the content on this channel. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!
If there was a love button I would have clicked it and then un-clicked it so I could click it again. Great vid.
thank you!
Castles are great, I'm fortunate enough to live in the country with the most castles per square mile in the world so it's great to learn a bit more about them.
This was great, my favorite video you've made yet.
Another outstanding video. Thank you for posting these.
Discussing logistics in a thick Tutonic accent is about the most Germanic thing I am likely to hear all year.
is it me or does his german accent make everything his say about military things sound 100% accurate and with 500% discipline
Hey, Military History Visualized. I have only started watching your channel a couple of weeks ago and was immediately in love. I am a very visual learner and have a passion for both History and Military stuff. This channel combines these things perfectly. I really like how well researched your videos are, you never "talk out of your ass" like some other would-be experts that you sadly find too often on youtube. Some of my favourite episodes were your ones on operation barabarossa. You really opened my eyes about how the Germans were not stopped by General Winter, a notion that had never occurred to me before. The way you showed that going for Kiev instead of moscow was actually the best idea was also really interesting and enlightening. One of my chief interests and I suspect also of many others is the Napoleonic era. I was wondering if you could something like you did about operation Barbarossa but for Napoleon's invasion of Russia. Maybe you could explain why this one failed or how it could have been avoided. Anyways I love your channel and it is a great resource for my 15 year old nerd brain to learn more about military history. I also like that you (due to being Austrian) can pronounce all the german words (and also often from other languages) correctly, something few youtubers can do and that is often annoying to a german speaker like me. I am swiss by the way. Grüezi! Anyways, Ich liebe diesen Kanal und werde definitiv weiterhin zuschauen.
I
Speaking of Medieval Castles. There lot of castle design and function around the world. This is surely an interesting topic. Keep up the good work.
Ahh.. back in the day when we did cool stuff and flags look just awesome.
Good ole medieval ages !
Excellent work. I think most people think of a work like Heidelberg, but those like Schloss Nauses would be more common.
I got a PDF downloaded of the book "Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades" thanks to this video... thanks mang. Got some new reading material now.
:DDD
Your English really is excellent - keep making these high-quality videos!
awesome video man!! keep making this amazing content!
I came across in art history where the professor indicated some that gave a hint of the time. Within a photo she pointed out to us the residency in the fort or castle had large glass windows,... during a time when there were definitely raiding and pillaging. It was explained not every place experienced the same amount of chaos or had it to occur all the time and there was affluence and flourishing during that dark age/medieval era contrary to what our modern perspective has of the time.
When you talk about Chateau-Gaillard you give the building dates as 1179-98 but the slide shows 1197-98...
yea, happens to germans sometimes because in german you switch the numbers.
To expand on Herr Lambrecht´s comment:
Lets take a number, thirty-five, and translate it into German. It is _fünf-und-dreißig_. _Fünf_ stands for five, and _dreißig_ for thirty (_drei_ means three)
So that way you can see how it is quite simple to mix stuff up, specially with bigger numbers.
Your thumbnails are incredible i cant help but click on them.
If you can get to Dover Castle there has been an attempt to show how the state rooms would have looked originally. This was built by the King to impress visitors.
please do more castle videos
Very interesting as always. Thank you for your vids :)
very good analysis
Not sure if it sounds like a `castle` but recently found out about `Fort Drum` (El Fraile Island) made in 1906,i believe it is a great example how these kind of principles can be combined with water,a lot of water. :) Great video.
`
garri-son.. no insult intended just a correction in pronunciation.. I love your work. Keep it up.
VERY PROFESSIONAL MADE EDUCATION; THANK YOU
The Krak did not fall quickly. It fell due to a trick.
The hole story of the surrender of the castle is quite fun.
Good video, in particular on the costs!
Here's a Castle Question I'd like to see: If you had to build a modern castle today using all of the features of Medieval castles taking into account things like modern weapons how would you do it? What's the best structure for say a homestead and farm?
Castles are an easy target for even light artillery and grenades. Concealed mg positions with underground shelters, mined areas and an early warning system with infra red motion sensors might be better for a homestead. If more resources are available any counter artillery might be good either inform of an own artillery or, more modern, a small drone with an explosive payload.
Considering how long it took to build a stone castle, I wonder if it was common practice to first build a simple wooden castle (or at least wooden defensive walls) on the site for temporary protection of the workers/materials/supplies.
I love this channel! :)
Huh... I actually live in Nevers, I want to check out that Auxerre Monastery now.
Anger's castle is pretty awesome. (Advise from an inhabitant of this town)
Krak Des Chevaliers was probably the greatest castle ever created. It was large, effective, very intimidating, and it was never taken by force.
The Mamulk Sultan Bybars had to trick the garrison into surrendering with a forged letter.
castles would usually have their own basic breweries I think, to offset the lack of a clean water supply they could turn grey water into weak alcohol. but maybe this was less common than I thought
no way like my favorite time period thanks for the vid!
Holy shit I'm like 10 minutes away from Rhuddlan castle :D
Lucky you
Fascinating video, good work!
i am slightly critical of the garrison numbers: you seem to largely look at british and french numbers.
In 'Germany' there was one castle to every 450 people or so, so a garrison or even a population of 2000 people is extremely rare.
where in Brittain we are talking about maybe 200 castles all told, in 'germany' we are talking about 20.000.
In Holland (proper) we are talking about 117 castles, some of which only really represented a tower surrounded by a moat.
a four room castle like Dever in Lisse was pretty common for a knightly 'house'
castles are often defined as defensible residence and centre of local government. this does not have to be a huge fortress to be 'crenelated' or seen as a castle back then.
Most castles i have seen would struggle to provide shelter for 2000 (!) people long term, even larger ones like Warwick, and definitely the Wartburg, for instance, and i wonder what the source really says, it might be the troops they might be able to deliver for war, for instance, which does not represent an actual garrison or permanent billeting of troops.
Most castles must have had populations of about 10-20 maybe.
Great videos thx Marry X-mas
awesome research i will save.
hoping you could do a video highlighting the differences between Operation Overlord and Operation Market Garden, why one succeeded and one failed.
i'd say overlord just allowed more margin for error, whilst market garden's main objective (keeping the Rhein-crossing intact) was too chance-y; every bridge along the way was a coinflip that, if unsuccesful, would negatively modify the final diceroll for the paratroops in arnhem.
However from a strategic standpoint i think Market Garden was at least not a total failure:
Firstly i think for all the dutch people that were liberated along the way by the ground forces, would call this a success in it's own right,
then there's the morale boost for all the allied troops if you let them know high command is doing everything it can to 'end the war by christmas' and they need you (the soldier) to help do your part, even if you're fighting in france, or Italy.
thirdly: german command had to commit quite a few reinforcements, including armoured divisions, to get the paratroops at Arnhem away from the bridge, not to mention afterwards, when they had to maintain defensive positions of all the other (even potential) points for crossing an army.
This means all the other operations would therefor encounter less heavy resistance than if Market Garden never took place.
Lastly; tying in with my last point:
The allies forced germany to widen their defensive lines, meaning that germany will have to make sacrifices to Anti-air defences on either strategic level
(lessen the depth of your AA defences to commit them near the front to repel ground attack planes, supporting allied ground forces, allowing allied bombing of german factories etc. to be more succesful)
or on the tactical level (instead of redirecting AA to the frontlines, you just use the number you already had on the front, but they have to try and cover a lot more airspace than before, spreading them too thin to be anywhere near as effective at repelling ground attack planes)
This is just from the top of my head, mind you; I imagine 'Military History Visualized" would have a lot more to say about this, maybe even correcting me on certain things, so i would still watch a video like the one you proposed.
Overlord was years in the planning yet nearly foundered on Omaha Beach. Market Garden was days in the planning and it showed.
At around 8:19 I was wondering about the garrison... Where are all the "maintenance" personnel (cooks, stable-boys and whatever a "cleaning lady" is in medieval terms) and shouldn't they get paid something too, increasing the total maintenance costs?
As always, great video! Amazing how you constantly seem to find the type of topics of which i immediately think "yeah, I've always wondered about that". :)
> "yeah, I've always wondered about that". :)
that is my approach for quite some of my videos. Had an article about building costs for a castle than I realized while reading I have no clue how a castle is built started working on that, but didn't have enough data. Stopped, made another video and a few weeks later I took a different look at castles.
thanks. About the other personnel, I don't know, but I assume that their cost was minor and they would also produce stuff and the feudal system. Also the porter also had a janitor function if I am not mistaken.
In those days, you could pay your taxes with labour. So the staff of the castle was mostly not permanent and did not live inside the castle. Only a few very big castles in Europe had permanent staff (castles of kings).
“Massively fortified erections” reminds me of wealthy old men for some reason. Love your vids, and your accent!
Very well done! :)
Well if they just put the reinforced barricades and use the semi-auto shotgun, the enemy team will have some trou- oh wrong Castle? Whoops.
One of the reasons to build a castle was to have an oubliette. A recent show I watched said almost every single castle has one but they like to keep that quiet due to tourism and being P.C.. Someone actually went all over the place investigating castles and was quite shocked to learn that they most all had one. It's just a tiny area hidden away to toss prisoners into and forget about. Slowly starve a personal enemy to death. Hopefully one which they can claim titles from.
I don't think that was a reason to build a castle. That would be a quite an overkill.
Also, who does keep quiet about it and what does this have to do with P.C.? In all the castles near my hometown (there are dozens of castles), there are guided tours for the oubliettes and dungeons in which the tourists and visitors get to see it along with torture chambers and the various kinds of cells.
I have to wonder what the source is of all this interesting detail on the expenses and income that really shows what kind of situations people were in. Thanks again for sharing.
hihi 13:37 min
1337!
HAX
Quality work, as it is customary of yours.
A cool castle that I think it is worth mentioning is Guédelon Castle. Why is it important? Well, because it is not finished yet. It is perhaps the world's biggest archaeological experiment. The castle is being built exclusively using middle ages construction techniques. Wikipedia has a great gallery of images where you can appreciate the castle being built over the years: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gu%C3%A9delon_Castle
13:37 is the best part.
yeah, I was at 13:40 or something and saw the opportunity to cut the outro song... YET, in my video manager the video is 13:38, cause TH-cam!
The most important and dangerous element of ancient and Dark Age Castles is said to have been their aviaries. Anyone who's seen a certain Battlefield 1 scene probably understands why.
Since it seems that we're going more Medieval I'd love to see more on the Northern Crusades :)
Yeah it would be nice to hear something about the battles of the Baltic and Finnic tribes against the Teutons. In particularly why the natives ultimately lost. I always assumed it was because the Teutons had stone castles and the locals had wood forts as there are many accounts of the locals outmatching the knights on the battle field just to then fail at their fortification (Riga in particular). Now I wonder if it was because the Baltic had inferior fortification building technology or less siege experience or if the tech was indeed on par and it came down to resources with Teutons being able to afford better wood forts and/or more stone forts.
So many questions and so little material about that era around.
Nice video. Can you make a video about forts in the 18-19 century?
Love how little Wales is the Castle capital of the world. Germans, French and English all have impressive castles.. But if you want to tour medieval castles in good condition, Wales is the place to go
MHV fires-up "The Wayback Machine"!
New video = good day. And could you make a video on me 163 and ho223
Apparently english longbow archers were paid 3 shillings per day, which was about three times more than a peasant could hope for. To give more or less of an idea of how much that money was. Those 700 pound cost of running a castle each day is equivalent pay for 38 longbowmen or other such well paid non-nobility soldiers.
Edit: Oh, and look, the garrison had 37 people, i hadn't gotten that far in the video, but how's that calculation, huh? probably the knights earned more than 3 shillings, but the others earned less.
It would be nice to see a separate video about fortifications in Russian area in middle ages. There was no exact european castles, but rather slightly different constructions - кремль, город and гуляй-город for example. The word "город", which is being used this days to refer a city, truly means "fortification". Also, monasteries and churches were always built as forts basically, and were able to withstand sieges.
Were Medieval Sergeants professional soldiers with specialized and standardized equipment ?
Sergeants are commoners who pay tribute to their Lord by serving them personally instead of paying with gold or produce.
For example, you could pay tribute by working a certain number of days as castle guard, like the sergeants mentioned in this video.
+velikiradojica not always - sergeant means servant. Many nobles were servants of their overlords or the monarch, such as the Gentleman of the Stool, a very important person in medieval England as he would be alone with the King, which was a very rare event, so you could have an influence greater than you actual rank.
Professional, career soldiers, yes; standardized and specialized, not so much. They'd be equipped as well as their lord could afford. Maybe as well equipped as knights in some cases, but probably without so much expensive decoration. Idk from facts but I assume training would vary greatly by region, decade, economics, and the traditions and peculiarities of the house they served.
Thank you sir
Yes, they had to be centres of business to some degree just as much as military to keep up the running costs. I seem to remember this could be an early source of tension with the Catholic church in England as there was competition for markets (especially wool markets) with monasteries.
Makes sense that a garrisoned castle could also support a market.
They were usually built in centralized locations. I imagine they could exact a small toll in return for protecting merchants and their goods when they had nothing else to do.
great video, thanks
Excellent as usual. But one question: what about the Pre-Roman fortifications such as the Celtic forts in the Rhoen (Hessen / Bayern)?
A wooden palisade, a Motte and Bailley, a Keep, A stone Castle, A ROYAL CASTLE!
Superintresting!
"Castles were bases for offensive operations" but on the other hand "castles was expensive so few rulers could both afford a huge field army and a strong castle".
Great, I want more WW2, WW1, inter war, ancient, medieval, modern or anything else 🙂
My micro nation will have all the knowledge this man provides me with
I'd like to see a video about medieval castles and warfare in eastern Europe (ie. Bysantium, Poland and the Kievan Rus), India and east Asia in the future.
The way he pronounces "Garrisons" infuriates me to no end! xD
Very interesting video.
For castle cost estimations there is a very unlikely source in the acts of a litigation process between two archbishops in Spain in 1526-1527.
The acts can be found here: books.google.es/books/about/Las_fortalezas_de_la_mitra_compostelana.html?id=xtWkAAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y&hl=es
The origin of the feud was the destruction as many as about (minimum) 100-140 fortresses, towers and similar buildings during a revolution that took place in 1467-1469 in Galicia, North West Spain. Some of these fortresses belonged to the Compostela Archbishopy and many years later, a new archbishop claimed his predecessor for not reconstructing or repairing the depleted buildings, so a litigation started, witnesses were called, and construction masters evaluated the costs of rebuilding the castles. The acts were preserved and when they were rediscovered in the early 20th century they gave a glimpse of what actually happened on what was the long forgotten "Guerra Irmandiña" or "Brotherhood War".
Very good info
Woah, there's some misleading graphics in here: the upkeep cost of 700 pounds per year is shown as being 3.3 times the size of an income of 1000 pounds. I'm sure it's a simple mistake but it might be worth putting a note up.
The Motte ( mound ) was the original part , did a moat or defensive ditches & pile the earth in the middle until its high enough & then build a fort on top , from wood .
Then begin building in stone using the wooden surround as a protective curtain/ shield from angry locals shooting arrows at you , when its finished pull the pointless original wooden surround down & use for firewood.
Over time the castle on the mound would be enlarged, a stone gatehouse added & the 'baily' would have the church, feasting hall , stables etc .
Thst was the way the first Norman lords began, but over the next few 100 years things like round turrets were rebuilt as square towers, all kinds of changes, remodelled over the centuries.
In England many of the castles are ruins, not because of bad repairs, but most are down to Cromwells men filling them with gunpowder and blowing them up, because during our civil war in the 1600s many royalists used them as defensive sanctuaries, the 'roundheads' ( Cromwell's men) spent years or months besieging the castles , so each time they captured one they would do their best to destroy the castle, easier said than done, they never completely destroyed them but they made them uninhabitable.
You talked a lot about the cost of building and maintaining a castle. How about the financial benefits like tolls and taxes. Are they already included in the average income shown at 8:00 ?
So, roughly, the "Royal" income is 50x that of a baroni. If we consider the "Royal" income to be the largest administrative units, and the baroni the lowest administrative area, we could compare the income of a national government to that of a municipality. The federal gov of Canada income is ~300 billion $. That of a city of ~180k people (in a country of ~37 millions) is ~300 millions (or 1/10 of the biggest admin unit). Many municipitalies have something closer to ~30 millions (1/100).
From that napkin calculation, it seems to be that the proportional incomes of large admin units (nation govs, royals) to the smallests (baronies, municipalities) is somewhat constant through time.
But what about the dragons?
13:37 playing time ...420 blaze it MLG
What font did you use for the medieval quotes?
Deutsch Gothic
Its funny that Deutsch Gothic doesnt support ü. If you want, google has Germania One, which isnt exactly the same, but does support umlaute.
You should probably introduce your channel in the beginning.
Will you do modern fortifications like the Maginot Line?
Niccolo Macchiavelli argues in book 2 of his book Discorsi (p. 347 in my Dutch translation) that castles cause more damage than they give help. I think it could be interesting for you to check it out. His plea is based on internal politics and internal military reasons and is of a much later date than your film takes a look at. This comment is because of that not a retorsion of your film, but an addition. Hope you will appreciate it.
thx, I remember reading about it ages ago, probably more than 10 years. Yeah, at his time the importance of castles has past if I am not mistaken, but I will keep it in mind when doing future videos on more modern fortifications.
In the edition I have, the book 2 ends on page 300, so you are likely to be referring to page 247. Anyway, you must take into account that when Machiavelli wrote about castles, artillery had already rendered them
useless. Dragging huge cannons was a chore, but once they were in place, they could bring walls down in a matter of hours. The bastions were yet to be invented. Castles are important because they drag a lot
of troops into a long siege. This denies the chance of a surprise attack, give time to your lord summon troops from other counties (remember there was no professional standing army), prevents the enemy going further into your territory without committing troops to sieges (if they did they would be without supply, news, reinforcements, etc... and prone to be encircled) and dissuade adversaries with less manpower than you to attack in the first place. Only those rich in terms of both money and men could gamble in the siege lottery.
Note that Machiavelli also wrote about castles in other books in a more political and less militaristic terms. He was a bold enthusiast of regular offensive infantry fighting with high moral and that required a lord to be fair, even if strict.
Why only 1000-1300?
Why not just go the whole middle ages from 1000-1500, or is that another video to look forward to?
Cannons, dude.
Cannons didn't end the middle ages(or castles). They were in fact a large part of the late middle ages. It helped that that most were best described as explosive battering rams until the Renaissance.
It wasn't even cannons that finally took Constantinople(against popular conception), but an idiot who forgot to lock a side gate.
yes but cannons drastically changed castle design so he will probably cover that in a different video
Dude, nothing changes instantly. Cannons didn't swipe castles and ends the age as the time they come, they just opened the gate to the end of the castle age, like other factors. Don't forget that there were castles even in the end of the 19th century, like cannon was in the late medieval.
And if you really believe the shit about the Fall of Constantinople, you've never seen the situation of the Walls around the old Istanbul then...
Cemre Ömer Ayna I did not say that cannons wiped away castles. I said that they changed their design. They switched from tall thin walls to short deap sloped walls supported by earthenworks. Artillery peices where Incorporated into castles and that drastically changed thier arrangement as there was now an emphasis on creating well positioned gun emplacements and robing attackers of good spots for their own artillery. There was also a growing focus on defense in depth and the creation of killing fields through overlapping fire. Overall castles became much more complex and expensive and their intended role changed. That is why it would be better to cover late medieval and Renaissance fortifications in a separate video.