Malplaquet 1709 | 18th Century Europe's Bloodiest Battle
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ก.ค. 2024
- With France at the breaking point, and two of history's greatest generals on its doorstep, who and what will save it?
Music from:
B / artemgreben
Ben Hayden
Filmstro
Visit my Discord for video previews and updates!
/ discord
References/Sources:
Falkner, James Great and Glorious Days: The Duke of Marlborough’s Battles 1704-1709
1 Jan 2003 Spellmount Publishers
Morris J. Graham The Battle of Malplaquet Battlefield Anomalies
Retrieved From: battlefieldanomalies.com/the-...
Nicholas Dorrell, 19 April 2015: Marlborough’s Other Army The British Army and the Campaigns of the First Peninsular War, 1702-1712, Helion and Company
MacDowall, Simon Malplaquet 1709: Marlborough’s Bloodiest Battle
2020 Osprey Publishing Ltd.
Sturgill, Claude C, 1965, Marshall Villars and the War of the Spanish Succession
University of Kentucky Press
Kronoskaf, Project WSS Battle of La Gudina
kronoskaf.com/wss/index.php?ti...
00:00 Intro
00:47 Strategic Situation
06:44 La Gudina
09:13 The Armies Prepare
11:23 Bois de Sars Attack
17:39 Dutch Attack
20:23 Counterattack Halted
23:00 Cavalry Battle
26:01 Results
“However, they were tired - for unknown reasons - after not even being shot at once.” Haha, love the contempt dripping through that sentence.
they retired* but yes
@@FieldMarshalYT It actually _sounds_ like you say tired although it becomes clear later what you did say.
Find it interesting how this and the Battle of Poltava happened almost simultaneously. 1709 changed the world as we know it.
Poltava was Sweden VS Russia, right...?
@@NobleKorhedron yup
@@NobleKorhedron it marks the beginning of the end for the Swedish empire
the most fascinating part imo is how King Charles XII was offered the opportunity to mediate the issue of Spanish succession, and he turned it down. If he had mediated, he could've possibly prevented the war in its entirety and potentially made allies that could've helped him in the Great Northern War.
Yes. Plus, Bach and Handel were composing masterpieces every year.
Inexplicably, the Franco-Spanish victory in the battle of La Gudiña or the Caia River (May 1709), on the Badajoz border with Portugal, is practically unknown or very little valued for its strategic consequences in Spain. Thanks for giving it the spotlight it deserves.
Fun fact. While Tilly was de facto the highest Dutch commander after Overkirk died, he wasn't officialy promoted. This was because the Dutch provinces of Frisia and Groningen rather saw their Stadtholder, the Prince of Orange, in that position. The fact that the Dutch Republic wasn't a unified state made for these kind of messy politics
It's always exciting to learn about a war of which I know next to nothing in great detail. The quality of the script, audio and animation gets better for every video you make!
Fantastic! 👍🏻
I know. Before this video I knew that Malplaquet was a battle thanks to "Empire Deluxe" which has a city named after it and that the war of the Spanish Succession had something to do with "Colonization". Now I know 10,000 times as much it seems.
Heir not “hair”. Just starting to watch it. I also know no nothing of this
Oh dear. I am sure you are presenting a high quality video but i simply cannot stand mispronunciation. Hair for heir ( pronounced “air”). And hag for Hague… good luck but i suggest a third party review prior to posting
A little known effect of this battle is that a rumor spread in the french army that the duke of Marlborough died at Malplaquet. Although it proved false, it was enough to raise the morale of the troops and civilians alike.
Nowadays, this event is commemorated in France with the children’s song « Marlborough s’en va t’en guerre » (Marlborough went to war)
Better known outside of France as "For He's a Jolly Good Fellow."
This song is still known and sang for kids: th-cam.com/video/DEHJLd8QRz8/w-d-xo.html
In the song he is called "Malbrouk"
@@erichammer2751= the two melodies have nothing in common. Try to listen on YT.
Try on YT “malbrough s'en va-t-en guerre”; You'll see the two melodies are not at all the same.
Amazing video, you are certainly perfecting your craft and niche. I don't think I've seen the Spanish War of Succession covered so well.
Absolutely fantastic content, it doesn't seem that any other TH-camr has done this on this war!
Absolutely phenomenal! I watched every second intensely. You are able to portray these battles as the accurate and desperate struggles that they were. The only downside is that now we have to wait until the next video!
Fortunately I got a new script writer. He writes for the channel Warhawk and is superb. He also pisses those scripts out like nothing so it's a load off for me. I'm getting to work on the Spanish campaign of 1710 as we speak!
@@FieldMarshalYT Good job well done sir
Just found this video, thankyou so much! I appreciate your narration. Its like listening to an audio book with visuals. Keep up the great work!
Absolutely amazing. Very well done. Thank you for sharing.
Excellent video! It is interesting to see how Marlborough used the same tactic as at Blenheim - attacking the flanks to weaken the French center leaving it open for attack - yet the quality of the French troops proved so good it almost failed here where it had succeeded at Blenheim. It speaks to the quality and dedicated work of raising the morale and quality of the French Army.
Interestingly enough, Napoleon would use the exact same tactic at Waterloo in 1815, only for it to fail like here, and then the overall tactic got lost in the chaos of the latter part of the battle.
If you’ve watched the latest video on Napoleon’s Italian campaign, he also used the same tactic to force Wurmser’s army into Mantua at the battle of San Giorgio.
Napoleon was more of a flanking or blasting you to pieces from a distance kind of guy and his center attack only happened because his planned attack on the wings failed or were bogged down long enough before the prussians arrived. His plan was to crush the brits then fight the prussians and heby the time he decides to launch the attack he's already under heavy pressure from the arriving prussians
Napoleon failed because the Prussians arrived
Excellent video! You did a wonderful job of explaining the battle with the aid of your graphics. I think I see the influence of Warhawk in your work. The war of the Spanish succession was a very bloody affair. You just picked up another subscriber.
The irish soldiers were called " wild geese" .The majority of the jacobite army ,left for France to fight under the Louis. Patrick Sarsfield been the most famous irish soldier to fight under the French banner.
Great work! I like it, that the video is so much detailed and has a good duration.
Great job explaining the battle. Well done.
Excellent material. Thanks so much.
I have just discovered your channel and I thank you for telling these battles which seem little known to the general public.
It's what I love to do
I've been waiting for this one. Very much the 18th Century Borodino. Good work Field Marshal. 😁
Fascinating, thank you !
Suberb job this. I doff my hat to you sir. Thank you for this most detailed, thrilling, and elegant history.
Amazing video. Thanks
Excellent as always. Love the period artwork.
French and English have a common chant about this battle. The one of the English is a very popular folk song. The one of the French is this one :
Malborough s'en va-t-en guerre mironton mironta mirontaine...
Malbourough s'en va-t-en guerre,
Ne sait quand reviendra (x3)
Which means, Malborough is going to war, don't know when he'll came back !
Effectively, he never got back !
Cheers friends !
He didn't come back because of machinations back in England. Marlborough was the best General of the war. Malplaquet was a setback but nevertheless, yet another victory...Luckily for France.
@@paulbantick8266 He did comeback, Marlborough launched two more campaigns after Malplaquet and both were very successful, the problem was that he had run out of time to move against Paris because the British were leaving the war after securing favorable terms.
This is so well made! Very Good!
Well done, loved it🙏👍
Excellent work!
I literally enjoyed every second of it
Fantastic video! Your channel deserves so many more subscribers and viewers. Keep going.
Glad to see this video's steam hasnt run out, thank you very much!
The scholarship behind this series of videos is exemplary. Well done!
I agree about the scholarship (since I contributed to its content), but where are the credits?
Excellent video thank you for making this
But the map should not show Paris on the banks of the Somme, or it should show the Seine running west to Normandy.
Great video thanks
Very well made; captivating story. Thank you.
Outstanding Video. One can realy notice how the quality of your Videos increases. Especialy the Audio.
Great video, really well done Field Marshal. +1 sub.
Excellent presentation. I see this channel growing. Subscribed.
What a great video. I've known this battle before but I've never been so riveted. Thanks.
10/10 mate!!!
Excellent, excellent!!
My friend you earned yourself a sub!
Loved the video dude! They just keep getting better. Can’t wait for more
Great documentary on a massive and underappreciated battle.
Thanks man!
Great Job! And this video already surpassed Oudenaarde's views that's impressive.
All under one week, even got me enough watch hours to become monetized
Great video
Congratulations, very good job.
Well done.👍🏻
“Hey this is very similar to that one TH-cam series that has cool animated maps and discussed the American Civil War, I think it was called WarHaw-“
In all seriousness this was an excellent video man, loved seeing the sneak previews for this in the discord server
Earned yourself a sub - quality video, sir!
Merci beaucoup pour cette présentation très intéressante 👍❤️😎
Great videos
What a battle, it must have been both truly horrifyingly glorious and terribly grand 😨
I like the parallel/reflection with the Antique king Pyrrhus saying "another such victory will see us undone" and this from Claude de Villars "another such defeat will see our enemies undone" (paraphrasing)
well done...great stuff...the first time my ancestors fought for Britain rather than Scotland
Down right Fascinating!!! Wish i was a fly on a tree witnessing the battle unfold :)
Battle duration would have been more than your lifespan 🤐😐
Amazing historical coverage of that historical matter of Spanish empire history
Very impressive work, count me as a subscriber.
This battle seems comparable to the Battle of Guilford Courthouse (March 15, 1781), where Major General Nathaniel Greene compelled Lieutenant General Charles, Lord Cornwallis, to meet in in battle on ground of Greene's choosing. Though the forces involved were vastly smaller than those at Malplaquet (4,400 for Greene and 1,900 for Cornwallis), it still saw a force believed to have been already beaten by its opponent being able to choose a place to fight a bloody battle that would cost heavy casualties (10-15% of Greene's army were casualties, but Cornwallis lost nearly a quarter of his strength) and decisively change the outcome of the conflict.
This video belongs to the best of the best on TH-cam. Bravo!
Excellent bonne narration très bon montage next vidéo I hope the battle of Denain
He has already uploaded it
@@Heisenberg882 thank you
I just love the clothee of this era. They looked so much better those days.
This presentation is like an Osprey volume in video, and that is high praise.
If I must make war,” “I would rather fight my enemies than my children.”
Thank you for your excellent presentation of the French victory at Malplaquet.This battle is seldom covered.
More like strategic victory but thank you!
Allied victory*
It was an allied victory. As I am old school, I don't even go by the idea of a "strategic victory", instead I would say a ''near-Pyrrhic victory" for the Grand Alliance. The reason I'd argue against it being a "strategic" victory is that as well is because the main strategic goals of France were not actually met. It was also famously a tactical defeat for France too, so claiming it as a "French victory" is some jest, surely?
@@kyriakospentheides thank you for sharing, I always had a problem with it being classified as on of Marlborough 's victories.
@@kyriakospentheides It is a french victory because the allied forces lost so much during this batle that they had to cancel their invasion of France. The Maréchal de Villars who was in command of the french army send a letter to Louis XIV after the battle saying :"another lost like this one and we will win the war".
very interesting
War of Spanish Succession was never forgotten in history... there is simply no reason for such a statement. All in all, great video, thanks!
Compared to other historical events, it gets very little coverage. There werent very many videos on it on YT before I started making them.
@@FieldMarshalYT Thanks for reply. What I meant was that anyone who likes history has heard of this war or at minimum about battle of Blenheim or Malplaquet. If you are talking about normal people, 80% of them don't know when ww2 started...
Please keep up the good work friend your a massive inspiration to so many even those bigger than you
Hopefully this gave you the inspiration you needed for Gettysburg
@@FieldMarshalYT Oh it did
All I knew about Malplaquet was that it is the bane of the House in “Mistress Masham’s Repose” by TH White. Thank you for fleshing out that very thin skeleton for me.
At 1:13, funny to see the Seine river flowing into the North sea just opposite of Dover.
so romantic
18th century, Beethoven, Mozart, organ music, colorful uniforms, men wearing powdered wigs and makeup, white stockings, three cornered hats
Nice work but can you zoom out the maps a bit? It would be more useful to have a larger overview of the battle.
Yep! Ive kept this in mind in more recent videos
Goes great with the book "The coronet of horse" by GA Henty
Love the cheeky mount and blade Napoleonic wars voice line
Commented for the algorithm.
What a surprise, I never heard about this battle till now
Unfortunately 18th century wars are often glossed over despite their significance in influencing the outcome of world history.
Elle est malheureusement peu connue. C'est dommage étant donné que même si nos armées quittent le champs de bataille, on leur inflige une telle concentration de morts et de chaos qu'ils doivent sérieusement remettre en question leur chance dans la victoire finale. Malplaquet a presque annulé à elle toute seule les terribles défaites de blenheim, ramilies et oudenarde.
En tout cas, merci De Villars de nous avoir sauvé, tout ça en infériorité numérique. Maintenant à notre tour de propager la bonne parole en faisant connaître cette bataille !
C'est lors de la retraite Française qu'a été inventé la chanson Malbrouk s'en va-t-en guerre.
A Malplaquet le lieu de la bataille s'appelle depuis La pature aux boudennes (le pré aux ventres).
I love the YT voice transcription of Bourbons - Bull Balls. But then again, the AI voiceover it was transcribing got Cambrai wrong - Cambr-eh not Cambr-aye.
What is the drum sound that is used in the intro? It is really good and I want to use it for my own stuff.
What a glorious battle ! The French won great glory , the Duch in second place also .
BS. Death and destruction being called "glory"...
@@e.s.6275 No , not that ; it is the way that individual men face death and destruction , that is called glory .
@@bernardotorres4659 there is no sense in facing death for the sake of destruction, and self-destruction.
Therefore, glory in this context is nonsense.
@@e.s.6275 Wars are terrible things and very undesirable , but they do occur , and they are unavoidable in spite of their undesirability and their terribleness.
Europe vs France... as very often in those times
Depuis Louis XIV jusqu'à Napoléon.
Trop fort pour eux. 😮
@@Raisonnance.Louis XIV, Revolutionary France and Napoleon I. But not all of Louis XV’s reign, France lost the Seven Years’ War and it was Prussia who had the coalition against them in that time. Also for the American War of Independence, during the time of Louis XVI, it was Britain facing the coalition.
I agree for Louis XIV and Napoleon though, but not the whole time in-between.
I think most major cigarette brands got their names from this war. The Duke of Marlboro. Troops moving Pell-Mell.
Will there be a separate video about the time 1710.-1714. of the war?
Yes, check my community posts
Bravo, excellente vidéo sur une bataille mal connue. J'ai eu l'occasion de visiter le champ de bataille en 2010, La zone est finalement très petite au vu des effectifs engagés. La topographie a peu changé: bois et plaine et Il ne reste rien de visible. Un passionné avait créé un petit musée à Bavay mais il semble qu'il n'existe plus.
Merci pour cette vidéo très détaillée
La chance. 😢
11:07
What??! This is... saddening. How did they feel, knowing that they would kill each others in a few hours? How did the French feel, as they had cheer Boufflers (?) when he told them "we shall have no quarters and give none"?
Truly, a sad sight.
Interestingly, the toilets at Blenheim Palace are called the Malplaquet Outhouse.
Hey if you google the names of these leaders and locations, you can see a pronounciation guide. It's only a couple of minutes per name, and would really help with your videos, since it's very hard to take them seriously when people have negotiations at "The Hag" 😄
I guarantee you, you are not the only person who has brought up the issue of pronunciation.
This was one of those battles you just ask " why?""
The wars of Louis XIV already prefigured the push of Revolutionnary France eastward with the Kingdom / Empire fighting against european coalitions.
This battle is almost like the 18th century version of Spotsylvania Court House
The Allied attack on the Bois de Sars reminds me rather of the Battle of Cold Harbor a hundred and fifty years later.
The top musical artists were baroque composers like Bach and Handel. The violence of battles like these seems the opposite of the relaxing harpsichords, woodwinds and strings of a baroque ensemble.
@ 4:00
I'm not surprised: Villars is in charge--a man they knew and trusted.
@ 4:35
Any worse, and he'd be hurling the trigonometric function Cos(M)
Just saying but I enjoyed every second and minute of this video and just saying but I would say that this battle in my opinion is the Antietam of the 18th century.
I'd refer to the Prince of Orange's attack on the French right as the "Pickett's Charge" of this war. Definitely my favorite battle of the period to study.
@@FieldMarshalYT oh okay.
Marlborough: "Prince, see to your division"
Prince of Orange: "Sir, I have no division!"
I like the factctheyvuse illustrations from the Osprey Campaign series book on this battle.
You mention in 19:43 that in 30 minutes over 5000 allied soldiers had been killed. But that is not correct. It is the Dutch army alone under the Prince of Orange who lost 5000 men in less than 30 mins since their initial assault on French positions. The overall allied losses were said to exceed over 20,000.
That's what I meant.
I watched this on a train, with sub titles, they must have been done by computer and not a human......
What about the devastating battle of Kunersdorf 1759 where king Friedrich II lost most of his army ?
34,000 casualties at Kunersdorf vs 41,000 at Malplaquet. The numbers I used in this video are a bit outdated as it's more likely the French suffered 17,000 while the allies suffered moreso around 24,500.
@@FieldMarshalYT Your numbers are not outdated since the consensus of historians who studied the battle is of about 11,000 French casualties and 22-24,000 allied losses. Only one Dutch primary source claims 17,000 casualties. Also the deathtoll was largely superior at Malplaquet than at Kunersdorf.
I wished that you had used Napoleon Total War or Empire Total War to illustrate this battle
But Napoleon was almost 100 years later!
I hope this is as good as it looks, with a channel name like Field Marshall it better not be fertilizer 😂
Same music and quote approach as History Marches Napoleon series :P
But thats a truly fantastic series so i see why you would copy it
Another of many French victories fighting outnumbered and against coalitions.
This was not a victory, albeit not exactly a defeat either.
@@FieldMarshalYT geopolitically, no, not a victory. Militarily, it was a victory. Defending against a numerically superior enemy, inflicting 2 to 3 times as many casualties, and retiring from a strategically insignificant field without incurring a route would absolutely be considered a victory in any military academy.
@@tbuxt3992 “Militarily, it was a victory”
In order to qualify as a military victory they would have had to stand their ground against the allied army, which they did not. Inflicting higher casualties is not enough to make Malplaquet a French victory.
“Defending against a numerically superior enemy”
Both the Allies and the French had about 90,000 men according to multiple historians. The main difference was that the French army was occupying a strong defensive position while the Allied army had to attack without the necessary numerical superiority required to guarantee a victory. The fact that the allies still managed to dislodge the French is an achievement in of itself, heavy casualties were inevitable.
“Inflicting 2 to 3 times as many casualties”
Most modern historians put the Allied losses at 20,000 and French losses at 17,000. Double casualties is already unbelievable enough, triple is ludicrous.
“Retiring from a strategically insignificant field”
Which for the allies enabled them to besiege Mons and later on besiege the other fortresses of Northern France while for the French it was just another source of casualties.
“Would absolutely be considered a victory in any military academy”
The battle which you’re describing would most likely be considered a tactical failure but an operational and strategic success for the retreating army in military academies. However, as I have made clear, none of the things you have described apply to the battle of Malplaquet.
@@CometTheProto
You're obviously completely distorting reality.
"In order to qualify as a military victory they would have had to stand their ground against the allied army"
What counts is who was happy at the end of the day.
"Both the Allies and the French had about 90,000 men according to multiple historians."
Absolutely not. Most historians give the French between 70,000 and 80,000 men, the allies between 85,000 and 120,000 men.
"Most modern historians put the Allied losses at 20,000 and French losses at 17,000. Double casualties is already unbelievable enough, triple is ludicrous."
Here is where you lie. The consensus for French losses is between 8,000 to 12,000. It's been established. What you call "most historians" is two partisan Dutch historians. A voluntary lie. That's what's ludicrous. Allied casualties are estimated between 21 to 25,000 men. So not only double casualties is totally believable, but triple is possible too.
Funnily you claim the allies didn't have the necessary strength to dislodge the French, but then you claim that them losing vastly more men is ludicrous. Lol.
"Which for the allies enabled them to besiege Mons and later on besiege the other fortresses of Northern France while for the French it was just another source of casualties. "
The allies' main objective was to take Paris and finally end the war. As a result of Malplaquet, not only would the allies never dream of taking Paris anymore, but they would never attack a French army on the battlefield for the remainder of the war. And you're saying "it was just another source of casualties." Ludicrous indeed.
@@lahire4943 "What counts is who was happy at the end of the day"
You're right, let's look at what Madame de Maintenon has to say about Louis XIV after news of the battle reached him:
*"Sometimes he has a fit of crying that he cannot control, sometimes he is not well. He has no conversation."*
"Absolutely not. Most historians give the French between 70,000 and 80,000 men, the allies between 85,000 and 120,000 men."
Michael Clodfelter: 90,000 French
Gaston Bodart: 90,000 French
John Fortescue: "An equal number of French"
No source I have ever come across mentioned 120,000 save for maybe the BritishBattles website (which FYI claimed that the French had just as many).
"Here is where you lie. The consensus for French losses is between 8,000 to 12,000. It's been established. What you call "most historians" is two partisan Dutch historians. A voluntary lie. That's what's ludicrous. Allied casualties are estimated between 21 to 25,000 men. So not only double casualties is totally believable, but triple is possible too."
The only source which mentions 8,000 casualties is Nicholson, who also provides no explanation whatsoever as to how they got that number, there is no bibliography. 12,000 is one of the lower estimates for the French and only counts killed and wounded. There were also 3,000 prisoners of war which have been excluded from the count. Other sources such as G.W.L. Nicholson put the French killed and wounded at 14,000, add 3,000 prisoners (Bodart's estimate for how many) and you get 17,000, which just so happens to be the numbers claimed by those "partisan Dutch historians" you speak so lowly of. Speaking of historians, may I know what credentials you yourself have to be charging those who have actually studied the subject with something as audacious as a voluntary lie? Especially when the figures given correlate with those given previously by older historians?
As for the Allied losses, Clodfelter using allied records puts their count at about 24,000, this number just so happens to include 4,000 missing who would have rejoined their units (as is what usually happens in battles with victorious armies). 20,000.
"Funnily you claim the allies didn't have the necessary strength to dislodge the French, but then you claim that them losing vastly more men is ludicrous. Lol."
I said the allies didn't have the necessary strength to *guarantee victory,* not that they didn't have the necessary strength to dislodge the French. That comes entirely down to the performance of the commanders, who did in fact manage to dislodge them from that position with equal numbers. Them losing more men is an inevitability, losing triple is ludicrous. Pay attention.
"The allies' main objective was to take Paris and finally end the war. As a result of Malplaquet, not only would the allies never dream of taking Paris anymore, but they would never attack a French army on the battlefield for the remainder of the war. And you're saying "it was just another source of casualties." Ludicrous indeed."
Perhaps you can try explaining why if the allies could never dream of taking Paris, how over the course of the next two years, Marlborough and Eugene went on to capture five major fortresses in Northern France and come within one fortress (Quesnoy) of Paris itself before it all came tumbling down due to Marlborough's dismissal? As for "never attack a French army on the battlefield," that was due to Villars' own reluctance to accept battle and the fact that he had a perfectly good line of fortresses from which to defend Paris. He had multiple opportunities to fight a battle when the Allies were besieging Douai, Aire, Saint-Venant, and Bouchain, he took none of them and was instead outmaneuvered.
"You're obviously completely distorting reality."
Rather funny coming from someone who claimed Malplaquet stopped an allied advance on Paris when they calmly resumed their advance in 1710 and 1711.