There’s a few exceptions to the rule of officers not carrying pistols: the first being if they’re mounted - e.g. the brace of riding pistols supposedly taken off Pitcairn’s horse at Lexington and Concord (which, incidentally, may not have belonged to Pitcairn at all). The other exception being if the officer in question is in a Highland regiment, they may carry a highland pistol - but that’s not an officer thing so much as it is a highland thing.
@fulgursagitta5049
5 ай бұрын
Aye, there are many portraits of highland officers or just highland gentry carrying Doune or other highland pistols and many highland officers carried the basket hilted broadsword over the other blades mentioned.
@podemosurss8316
Ай бұрын
Well, there's also a third exception: It's the Spanish Army in the Napoleonic Wars and afterwards 😅
@benjaminlammertz64
5 ай бұрын
As they say in the imperial guard: "You know the situation is fucked when the comissar starts shooting the enemy."
@Marinealver
5 ай бұрын
Mine killed more Guardsmen than Bad Guys.
@geodkyt
5 ай бұрын
As we used to say when i was an infantry NCO, "If the Captain has to clean his pistol, it has *officially* been a 'Bad Day'."
@infoscholar5221
5 ай бұрын
I role-played a Confederate Infantry Lieutenant during a huge Civil War reenactment, in Louisiana, in the early 2000s. The historical staff said I could carry a cavalry - type sabre, no other weapon, and its primary use was to flash signals to my men - I marched out front of them, held the sword high, and how I held it gave them a clear order, by sight, because they couldn't hear, above all the gunfire and cannons, whether to march, Forward at the Quick Step, Charge, or Retreat. It was great fun; I was told to die at the Hundred Yard (before the enemy) marker, or at their third volley, whichever came last. Still have that sword.
@stonedog5547
5 ай бұрын
As an Officer, your spadroon is for waving (and cutting wedding cake). Your ranged option is a deadly, multi-shot, self-propelled and self-loading weapon....... Its called a 'Company' (but it is a little large to tuck in your sash of a morning)
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
Well what a coincidence! The only thing my Marine officer sword ever cut was OUR wedding cake! It's the only thing it could cut! Being strictly for cermonial use it's got no edge to speak of BUT it's high quality stainless steel!
@watchface6836
5 ай бұрын
You win this comments section. That killed me man.
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
@@watchface6836 Thanks! OOO-RAH!
@Davie-jx4rh
5 ай бұрын
@@wayneantoniazzi2706dang, I mean they probably should sharpen it, if there’s any group insane enough to attempt a sword kill in modern combat, it’d be the marines! Besides, there was a Vietnam bayonet charge, maybe a sword isn’t so far off?
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
@@Davie-jx4rh You know, about ten years ago an outfit called Cold Steel (still in business) DID make a Marine officer sword with a sharpened edge! They had a demonstration video of the same with a guy working over a pig carcass. He did a number on that carcass, let me tell you! However, not being a USMC authorized sword any Marine officer who bought one wouldn't be allowed to carry it during parades or other such things although there'd be no reason he couldn't buy one just for grins! Now if you wanted to carry a sword in combat the smart one to use would have been Cold Steel's reproduction of the M1917 US Navy cutlass. That one was sharpened as well and in addtion to which it had a blued blade with a sudued color scabbard. The Marine officers sword (properly termed the Mamaluke sword) looks great in ceremonies but it's a little too glittery for the modern battlefield. I've never heard of a bayonet charge in 'Nam but I wouldn't discount it, all sorts of crazy shit happened over there.
@canicheenrage
5 ай бұрын
Since we now know a regular redcoat had a musket and two pistols, i imagine a saber and 4 pistols for a british officer ?
@BrandonF
5 ай бұрын
how dare you
@canicheenrage
5 ай бұрын
@@BrandonF :P
@jackhiggins9926
5 ай бұрын
Wait wasn’t it a rifle
@THECHEESELORD69
5 ай бұрын
@@jackhiggins9926no no it was a blunderbuss
@bellakaldera3305
5 ай бұрын
A spadroon, a spontoon and perhaps a musketoon (especially for a dragoon).
@amandajones8841
5 ай бұрын
The officer's primary ranged weapon was the Company. To focus on a single firelock while letting dozens go uncommanded would be madness.
@JamieAubin-pu4hc
5 ай бұрын
When I was a Marine, one of the things I remember being clearly taught was that "the weapon of a Marine is a rifle. The weapon of a Marine Officer is his Marines. " It's interesting to see how enduring that philosophy is.
@bilanovitch
5 ай бұрын
As I've learned more about "linear warfare in the long 18th century " I have been struck by how sometimes the duty of the officer is simply to die, standing up under fire to encourage the men. Obviously not seeking death but risking it just so the enlisted men would follow. I don't quite get though, how junior officers would be able to avoid close combat during that grand old British tactic, the bayonet charge and melee. It would seem the officers, or at least the noncoms, would have to be right there dressing the line etc. the whole time. Another possible answer to the question what kind of ranged weapon did the officer have? Why, the whole damned platoon or company was his weapon!
@garylancaster8612
5 ай бұрын
Your final sentence is a very good point! Very true.
@BernddasBrotB7
5 ай бұрын
Brandon brings up the question of bayonet charges at around nineteen minutes in. Normally the enemy would retreat before the onslaught, not be meaningfully embroiled. If they DID stand and fight then yes, the sword could be used.
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
Not in the Spanish Army: in the Spanish Army the duty of the officer was to give in-site commands according to the missions each unit was assigned.
@TomFynn
5 ай бұрын
In "Master and Commander", Jack Aubrey pulls a cowering midshipman to his feet and tells him: "We stand tall on the quarterdeck." The job of an officer was to be seen. And in a way it was a duty to other officers, since promotion was often by filling a dead man's boots.
@95DarkFire
5 ай бұрын
@@podemosurss8316 So the same as in any other army?
@Riceball01
5 ай бұрын
On the subject of sword pattern regulations on swords, Matt Easton, of Scholagladiatoria, has shown that it wasn't unheard of for officers to skirt the regs in various ways. If the regulations call for a brass hilted, and officer who feels they might see combat would sometimes get a steel hilted sword but get it gilded to look like it's brass. Other times an officer might not like the current regulation sword, usually because they feel that the blade shape or size wouldn't be that effective in combat and so would use the blade of an older pattern of sword, or from a completely non-regulation sword and add a regulation hilt so that while sheathed it looks to be regulation or at least close enough. Brandon, you should really reach out to Matt Easton one of these days and do a collab since you channels kind of overlap at times. You could both cover a particular battle, war, or campaign, and you could go over the uniforms and tactics while Matt would talk about the weapons, particularly the swords.
@briangarvey6895
5 ай бұрын
Thanks to our drawing from British and French military tradition, the United States Army still to this day considers the pike to be a symbol of an NCO, and the exchange of a unit's guidon on a pikestaff between incoming and outgoing senior NCOs is still part of the ceremony.
@bellakaldera3305
5 ай бұрын
When I am reenacting, I wear my hanger and carry a Spontoon, having some years of experience in martial arts, I have with a compatriot attempted exercises with the Spontoon to test it's utility as a practical weapon. I have found that the spontoon actually works well, especially when facing men armed with socket bayonets, for the crossbar of the spontoon easily catches the bayonet and diverts it away when parrying. The large spear point of the spontoon also would deal a larger wound than the narrow point of a bayonet.
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
That's interesting, your eperience with a spontoon. I'm reminded that during the Revolution General Washington forbade infantry officers from carrying longarms like fusils believing if the officer was using it he wasn't doing his primary job of directing the troops. Spontoons were permissable however for the officer's personal protection. If there were any complaints I've never read any in the historic record.
@DukeTKIV
5 ай бұрын
Can we see the loadout of NCOs next?
@richardnoah2922
4 ай бұрын
In the words of sergeant Major Plumley, “by the time I need a rifle, there will be plenty laying on the ground”
@chickennugget4724
5 ай бұрын
We already know a regular British foot soldier has a "musket rifle" and two pistols, an officer must have dual sabers and 4 pistols
@angeryping9765
5 ай бұрын
It's interesting that you share a screenshot from War of Rights. The playerbase tends to come from reenactors and nerds. The COs in the game have pistols and sabres (with some exceptions where you can carry a rifle), but none of the players actually use them. Most of the time the COs are talking strategy with the other COs/NCOs or issuing orders to their own company. The only time they use their pistol/sabre is when they facing certain death (either leading a bayonet charge or getting charged out by the enemy). I'm not too sure how real combat works, but when I'm playing as an officer, the first thing on my mind is understanding the overall battlefield. If I find myself in the line shooting instead of ordering my guys to move, I'm likely condemning my team to a loss.
@TheDespairbear
5 ай бұрын
I dont know if it is being said by others, but your segways into video sponsors is fantastic. This is the only chanel I watch the adds on. They are a humorus addition to a serious subject, and a very welcome addition.
@engine4403
5 ай бұрын
this was a good light video. Games really dont have a proper place right now to portray any kind of chaos, what we are mostly looking at in the modern real time strategy sphere are games based on Command & Conquers groundwork, which itself was a genre shift from turn based strategy games which all started out as computer adaptations of tabletop wargaming. Id imagine it pretty difficult to properly portray the chaos of battle on a table in the living room where everyone can see all the toy soldiers
@dmman33
5 ай бұрын
A separation of functions between combat and decision-making is perfectly sensible. It’s great to walk through the logic of how armies worked. You’re fantastic at this!
@RandomAussie-dx9fj
5 ай бұрын
If anyone is wondering, the song “British Grenadiers” mentions fusils. “When’er we are commanded to storm the palisade, Our leaders march with fusils and we with hand grenades”
@chrisbeer5685
5 ай бұрын
Thanks, I had thought it was "fuses"
@RandomAussie-dx9fj
5 ай бұрын
@@chrisbeer5685 That is also correct, it is spelt in many ways
@poil8351
5 ай бұрын
Fusils were basically a small musket with a firelock instead of the standard flintlock which were originally used by artillery and designed to prevent accidental spraks setting off artillery ammunition.
@RandomAussie-dx9fj
5 ай бұрын
@@poil8351 Oh, that's interesting
@yetanother9127
3 ай бұрын
@@poil8351 To be more specific, the practice of artillery guards carrying fusils originated in an era when troops were commonly armed with matchlock arquebuses, which depend on a piece of constantly-burning matchcord as an ignition source; naturally, it would not be safe to carry around a bit of burning matchcord near the artillery's powder stores. By contrast, a fusil, which creates its spark only at the moment the trigger is pulled, can still be carried safely under those conditions.
@reillyford1412
4 ай бұрын
I know you are mainly focusing on British equipment, but a very simple google search would tell you that the Austrian Empire had standard issue pistol holsters for the infantry officers during the Napoleonic wars. So, considering at least one major powers of the time period made use of sidearms for the officer's, I'd say it is okay to include them in media. Still a great video as always.
@podemosurss8316
4 ай бұрын
The Spanish Army issued pistols during that same period.
@vukis_things
5 ай бұрын
This is an pretty interesting topic i have not seen anyone talk about it before.
@CC21200
Ай бұрын
I mean, if you're playing Total War but you have the option to control your individual general character and use your weapon, it's probably a bad idea to use that option.
@mitutoyo34
5 ай бұрын
Nice Brandon! well done Sir. now I am intrigued by what would be the regulations for French officers since is my topic of Research...
@blackreign673
5 ай бұрын
finally some holdfast on this channel! this game usually has full games during peak hours and fun as ever
@jeff5534
5 ай бұрын
I’ve been so interested in the Napoleonic period for some time and your videos have been a wealth of knowledge as I’ve delved into this time, thank you for the content
@jamesvandemark2086
5 ай бұрын
Things seem to have been quite different for naval officers......
@gilesembleton
5 ай бұрын
well done. an officers role is situational awareness.
@jackdorsey4850
5 ай бұрын
Wow I was under the impression all Officers carried pistols thank you Brandon for clarifying
@NobleKorhedron
Ай бұрын
In the minute from 13:00 - 14:00... Brandon F: "they actually brought A LOT of extra stuff" Me: "*cough* 'Gentleman Johnny' Burgoyne *cough*"
@CoffeeFiend1
5 ай бұрын
It honestly wouldn't surprise me if some Officers did actually go a bit hollywood with multiple pistols, knives, hatchets, even a short musket/rifle of their own (obviously on a variable spectrum). If they were men of means and influence they could acquire such things, if anything the deciding factor would be more down to how concerned they were with how others perceived them because this kind of stuff would be very frowned upon and seen as improper.
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
The Spanish Army did use pistols for the officers in the later stages, due to the high intensity combat they needed to defend themselves.
@CoffeeFiend1
5 ай бұрын
@@podemosurss8316 Been waiting for some smart ass to chime in with "well actually did you know the Officers main weapon is their men that commander hurr durr I'm so enlightened and clever". But thankfully not. Whilst it's a perfectly valid point people often seem to think it invalidates the fact things can go wrong and circumstances are dynamic and often unpredictable. Like there's literally nothing stop an Officer with several pistols still doing his job, having a brace of pistols or carbine on his horse doesn't magically make him inferior at issuing commands and conducting battles.
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
@@CoffeeFiend1 In the Spanish case, I'm talking during the Napoleonic wars, and in those the Spanish forces used a more irregular (and flexible) kind of warfare, more similar to what was later seen during the Victorian era (in fact, the term "guerrilla warfare" was made for that kind of war). So, not the best example to draw upon for a "typical 18th century army".
@CoffeeFiend1
5 ай бұрын
@@podemosurss8316 Thank you for critiquing yourself.
@podemosurss8316
4 ай бұрын
@@CoffeeFiend1 Every army was different at the time, the most "typical" would be the British and the French.
@GraniteGhost778
5 ай бұрын
When did officer firearms become more standardized? I'm honestly curious when that trend began.
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
In the US military standardization certainly began by the Civil War, not so much by make and model but by caliber. .44 and to a degree .36 caliber pistol ammunition was supplied so an officer's pistol had to use either one. Mind you, during the Civil War officers had to purchase their own sidearms, they weren't supplied. It would be the same during the Indian Wars, .45 caliber ( .45 Colt or .45 Schofield) ammunition being suppled. By WW1 officer's sidearms were issued so it didn't matter although an officer had the option of carrying his own if he wanted. As an aside George Patton carried his one day famous engraved and silver-plated Colt Single-Action .45 during the 1916 expedition against Pancho Villa (He killed several Villistas with it) but when deployed overseas during WW1 he left the Single-Action home and carried a .45 automatic in combat. He didn't care for it saying: "If you want to kill people use a revolver, if you just want to make noise use an automatic!" I believe the British Army during the Victorian Period was pretty much the same, officers purchased their own sidearms but they had to chambered for standard issue ammunition. By the way, John Dillinger didn't like automatics either. As he put it "Never trust an automatic or a DA's deal!"
@mikkonahkola1590
5 ай бұрын
... and conversely, in some other militaries this happened much later. British officers were buying their own pistols for WW1 still, certainly.
@podemosurss8316
4 ай бұрын
For Spain, around the Napoleonic wars (due to the high-intensity combat, the officers needed to defend themselves).
@megarural3000
5 ай бұрын
Most excellent transition to advertisement.
@50043211
5 ай бұрын
"... no, this isnt to say that every officer was just running around in what ever crazy get up that they thought looked the coolest!" ohh man 😭😭😭
@britishmexico2372
5 ай бұрын
9:16 SMOOTH ASS TRANSITION, BRANDON
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
Totally off-topic, but I do want to remind all here (We're all history buffs, right?) that on this day, April 15 1912 at 2:20 AM the RMS Titanic sank after a collision with an iceberg, 1,500 souls losing their lives. 112 years ago. And it was a Monday as well. "Roll on Titanic roll, you're the pride of the White Star Line. "Roll on Titanic roll, into the mists of Time!"
@loicbazin1053
5 ай бұрын
I really like and enjoy your content. Do you know of anyone doing similar stuff but say more the 7 years war or the war of Spanish succession preferably in French? Keep up the good work.
@caldesigner8679
5 ай бұрын
It would be a much better portrayal in video game if the officer player can control a whole company of AI soldiers. Kinda like in Enlisted where the player is always accompanied by his AI squad.
@geodkyt
5 ай бұрын
Even later, during the second half of the 19th and the first half of the 20th Century (and still somewhat the case in many forces today), when pistols *are* commonly carried by infantry officers, they are as much a badge of rank as an actual weapon. This is why you see a common push (particularly in Continental armies) for pistols in fairly small calibers (by WWI and WWII, .32ACP was considered a perfectly adequate pistol caliber for officers, particlurly for field officers and above - much like a senior officer in the 18th Century would be more likely to wear a small sword or a short hunting sword than the company officers would be.)
@podemosurss8316
4 ай бұрын
Not in Spain, though. Here our army learnt the hard way that combat can get high-intensity very quickly in the Napoleonic wars, and carry defense pistols ever since. In fact, in 1909, after having had problems on skirmishes against Morocco due to the lack of range for the previous officer pistols, the Spanish Army commisioned a new kind of ammunition for pistols, the "long" ammo (with longer range), used in the Bergmann M1909 and later in the STAR pistols.
@JBils41
5 ай бұрын
‘If two British Army officers are on duty and they find that they are dressed exactly the same, then the junior officer shall be required go and change…’ 😉
@ashcarrier6606
5 ай бұрын
In the artillery we had a thing called the "Unit Basic Load". The UBL. Each platoon would have a mix of high explosive, smoke, DPICM, FASCAAM, and Copperhead to handle what would come up. The Unit Basic Load. I translated that down to practical human understanding. For example, if you go to Burger King, the the UBL is a Whopper, then either the Big Fish ir the classic Chicken Sandwich. And onion rings. That is a proper UBL.
@pyry1948
5 ай бұрын
What do junior officers even do at the tactical level of combat?
@BrandonF
5 ай бұрын
Good question! I have a video all about that: kzitem.info/news/bejne/mIaJ2J6Dn4yJf4Y
@sirfox950
5 ай бұрын
@@BrandonFOnce again Brandon F, in his impetuous lust for glory and victory, has snatched education from the jaws of doubt and swiftly provided his men with the proper source of tactical understanding of... I don't know, I'm done
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
For the Spanish Army (exerpt of the Royal Ordenances of Carlos III, translation by me): "Each officer on duty will be responsible of the observance of the orders given to his forces, both particular and the general Ordenances, as well as, in the case of accidents and unforseen circumstances, taking the lead on dealing with the situation, case and object, having to choose the most righteous option for his honor." So, basically, a bit more "modern" than in the British Army, and on the line of what would be latter called "leading by task": each Spanish officer was given a set of objectives on the battlefield and a degree of independent thought for how to use their forces in order to accomplish those taks. The following excerpts in the Ordenances (book 2, title 17th) go in further detail on the rules that Spanish officers must obey for various kind of missions they might be ordered to, ranging from campament duties, escorting supplies and conduct in the battlefield.
@pyry1948
5 ай бұрын
@@BrandonF does not answer it. What do they even do on the field except trim the lines n stuff???
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
@@pyry1948 In general, for the Spanish Army it was taking direct command of their men so the units perform the mission it has been assigned to with "the due diligence". Giving that the British were more of a "top-bottom" approach, they probably did similar but with far less leeway.
@captainscarlett1
5 ай бұрын
In my NCO training in the Australian army it was made very clear that officers weren't soldiers per the Defence Act. You never march in the gutter because you're not an officer. QED.
@therecalcitrantseditionist3613
5 ай бұрын
Sir you absolutely are, and shall remain, the only KZitemr that will ever get me to watch an entirely skippable add. And for a product i have no interest in none the less. Cheers to that
@2manyIce
5 ай бұрын
If you would ask me what an officer would use for ranged combat, I would say he would use the body of infantry men under his command.
@RoachDoggJr2112
5 ай бұрын
Brandon you should play the steam game called Batllegrounds III. It’s a mod of Half Life 2 that got a stand-alone release. The game is pretty nearly dead but has a dedicated fan base. It’s based off of the American revolution, and it’s as close to accurate as a mod for Half Life 2 can be.
@Tareltonlives
5 ай бұрын
I know this is outside your expertise, but now I'm wondering about officers in previous centuries. A halberd? Would they still just have a sword? Would this be true of the Mughals and Ottomans and Ruriks? I would imagine it would be similar- just a sword or polearm to signal. Two of my favorite anecdotes about the 96 smallsword I can't find, but one was of one British officer in the Niagara front in 1812 using his as a cooking spit before the battle, and the other is of one in India fighting the Marathas and having a Tulwar snap it in half. I did once subscribe to the pistol brain bug before I learned better.I wonder if it was true in the Navy as well.
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
Spanish officers used the same weaponry as the soldiers they commanded until the 17th century (in which they adopted the spontoon), that is: the primary weapon (pike or musket) plus a sword. In the 17th century they began using the spontoon, which was dropped in the 18th century in favour of just a sword. In the 19th century (due to the high-intensity warfare of the Napoleonic wars) pistols were added.
@Tareltonlives
5 ай бұрын
@@podemosurss8316 Thank you!
@Malcio
5 ай бұрын
Brandon can you break down the movie the crossing 2000.
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
I watched "The Crossing" when it first aired. In my opinion it was good, but not great. Not something I cared to watch again.
@muhammadfaqihalazhar8443
5 ай бұрын
How would a battle between a longbowmen vs musket line infantry looks like, assuming they are at range 800 yard far away? A lots of people might think that longbowmen would win againt a musket line infantry because they will volley fire them with a rain of arrow at range 400-300 yard away and musket line infantry wouldn't be able to return fire until at range 100 or 50 yard because musket are so "extremely inaccurate" beyond 100 yard.For me this so silly and doesn't make sense because a musket line infantry would fire outside of the bow range, but some people are still denial and stubborn, even though we tell them that musket line infantry win against bow, they still think that bow would win againt musket line infantry and musket is a useless weapon compared to bow.
@JayJet53
5 ай бұрын
Brandon did a video on this topic
@JayJet53
5 ай бұрын
Also 800 yards is outside of effective range for either weapon.
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
It's hard to tell, as the kind of place in which the battle happens and so on would matter, also the skill of the commanders, training and organisation, and so on. The closest kind of engagement which I can think of is the battle of Garigliano in 1503 in which Spanish arquebusiers came on top against French crossbowmen, with the Spanish army defeating a force 1.5 times its size en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Garigliano_(1503)
@sirfox950
5 ай бұрын
Where Spanish provincial units?
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
According to the 1768 Ordenances (Spanish regulation at the time), the officers were issued swords, but were also trained on using other weapons should the necessity arise.
@thijsrikkerink6333
5 ай бұрын
So where do you mount the laser
@Pandaonfire5
Ай бұрын
Best in-video ads on KZitem 😂
@fwskungen208
5 ай бұрын
So their long range weapon is their unit Battalion/Regiment!
@lenny_1369
5 ай бұрын
British Dwarf named Latitude: 6:51
@cazperzero
5 ай бұрын
The officer's primary ranged weapon was his file, platoon, company or regiment
@sebastianlucius1259
3 ай бұрын
What did officers use for ranged combat? A half-company.
@garywheble4534
5 ай бұрын
During my time in service among other jibs I had I was also the Battery's Trumpiter and Bugler . We did a parade useing the freedom of Notingham as we were on foot not on hores RHA my position in the ranks was to the right of the Battery comander not in the ranks this I lernt was in the use of Trumpet and Bugle that I had two main jobs one was to listen for comands that were given to my unit and useing the Trumpet reply and Ackknowledgement also the use of the Bugle was to pass on Infantry orders to the Infantry and to send back there Acknowledgement my second job was to protect my Battery Comander with saber and carbine to protect his right side . This also seemed to be the job of the Buglers in Infantry Company's they also had a Batman Originally these men were chosen by the Company Colour Sargent to act as a liason between the Offcers Butler chief to make sure they had the means of food and shelter for the Officer and his personal staff and the Officer himself also on the field he would also act as a defence of the Officer and also act as his Compant Runner as his Closness to him in daily life he would also get to know other Officers buy face and name so when sent to deliver a message he would not Waste time looking for said Officer
@cjr4286
2 ай бұрын
The officer's weapon was his regiment.
@VexingWeeb
3 ай бұрын
What’s the difference between a fusee and a carbine?
@podemosurss8316
22 күн бұрын
The fusee is rifled.
@VexingWeeb
22 күн бұрын
@@podemosurss8316 thx
@MisterRorschach90
5 ай бұрын
Did medieval or ancient times have their concept of a special forces? I know the Persians had their immortals, you’ve got the winged hussars, and other heavy Calvary. But did anyone make any state sponsored special forces where they were armed with the pinnacle of what their technology and scientific advancement could make. No dollar spared. For instance at the time of 1700-1800s the best they could’ve done was a bulletproof steel chest plate, some kind of special leather and or chain mail protection, possibly rubber in the 1800s for joint protection. A hat helmet possibly even with cheek or face protection made of bulletproof steel plate in most vulnerable areas. Maybe steel toed boots, even with sole protection. Leathers used would be kangaroo or some other strong leather. The actual fabric uniform made from a special silk blend, more durable than standard wool or cotton. They carry a Japanese katana or some other Japanese made blade made for European militaries. They carry semi automatic musket pistols and revolvers with tons of extra ammo, powder, and primer with a special way to quickly reload those expensive and awkward firearms.
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
In the middle ages there were few "state-sponsored forces", as most forces were simply noble's retinue. In either case, for Western Europe: * Ancient times: The Roman Republic had elite units called "Triarii", which were formed by the most veteran soldiers in the Legion, and were extremely sturdy. Later, in the Imperial period, they had other elite units like the Praetorian Guards, or the Cathaphracts. * Latte middle ages: The Spanish Royal Army established a few elite units of arquebusiers and cannoneers, which would be later used for the Tercios. * Modern era (1500-1800): This is when most armies' special units began to shine. From marine units to the grenadiers and fusiliers, there were all kind of soldiers.
@MichaelLeBlanc-p4f
4 ай бұрын
How come British General James Wolfe is painted with a musket slung over his shoulder ???
@iantheduellist
5 ай бұрын
You need to do a collaboration with Nick from the Academy of Historical fencing, I'm seeing a lot of misconceptions when it comes to the swords. 😬😬😬
@BrandonF
5 ай бұрын
I'm not familiar with that channel but I'll have to check it out! Though, mind if I ask for a rundown of the misconceptions? I didn't think I really talked about swords themselves too much in this video but I'd love to provide a correction comment.
@iantheduellist
5 ай бұрын
@@BrandonF Take everything I say with a grain of salt, since I'm not in direct contact with antique pieces, all I know is what I've seen from channels like Scholagladiatoria and Academy of Historical Fencing. First off, the saber/hanger where more common as infantry soldier's weapons, not officer's. In the early to mid 18th century, offier's used smallswords and other duelling swords on the battle field, as well as backswords and heavy spadroons in the very early 18th century, all gradually replaced by the smallsword. The first sword that was regulation was the spadroon that you mention, and it wasn't universally hated. It all depended on who made the sword. And the regulation was really loose. (Academy of Historical Fencing goes into great detail on the spadroon) If I remeber correctly it was 32 by 1 inch minimum with the hilt being of the same color as your buttons. But thats where the regulation ends. You could put a beefy backsword or even scottish broadsword blade and it would be fine. You could also put an incredably stiff and light double edged blade for thrusting and parrying bayonets with ease. And the hilts could vary greatly as well. The 1796 is a more strict regulation, but the blades could still be greatly varied. The spadroon gets its bad reputation because a lot of officer's bought terribly low quality swords from goverment uniform retailers, but a good custom made spadroon, was a weapon to be feared.
@BrandonF
5 ай бұрын
I think most of this is more owing to miscommunication- I only said that sabres were the sword of choice for the American War of Independence, after which they were soon replaced. This is also the time when infantry basically stopped carrying hangers altogether for campaign use. It makes sense that some of the regulation swords would be more useful, though, because of the wiggle room allowed in those regulations.
@MichaelLeBlanc-p4f
4 ай бұрын
Poop. Gentleman Officers always needed a brace of pistols handy in case of a duel of honour.
@windalfalatar333
3 ай бұрын
Isn't a spontoon a kind of sword similar to a small sword? Am I confusing it with a phonetically similar word?
@BrandonF
3 ай бұрын
I think you may be confusing it with a "spadroon"
@windalfalatar333
3 ай бұрын
Spadroon! Sorry - spadroons is what I was thinking of.
@windalfalatar333
3 ай бұрын
@@BrandonF Yes, sorry, spadroon!
@windalfalatar333
3 ай бұрын
@@BrandonF Thank you for a wonderful video!
@BrandonF
3 ай бұрын
@@windalfalatar333 Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it!
@darthxerox15
5 ай бұрын
What game is featured here at 12:30 ?
@BrandonF
5 ай бұрын
Holdfast: Nations at War
@darthxerox15
5 ай бұрын
@BrandonF I didn't expect a response, thank you comrade!
@GorillaWithACellphone
5 ай бұрын
Father brandon has returned with milk (i hope)!
@ZombieStoleMyShottie
5 ай бұрын
Warning to audiobook listeners, the audio version of With Zeal and With Bayonets Only is nearly unlistenable.
@Chernochegger
4 ай бұрын
They have defensive weapons
@andrewprice1774
5 ай бұрын
I think it should be the other way around 🤔 if more of the higher-ups had to actually fight then I imagine there would be fewer wars!!!!
@BrandonF
5 ай бұрын
Officers tend to die at much higher rates than other ranks, in much of history.
@christianszabo4889
5 ай бұрын
Holdfast DOES NOT focus on realism 😂😂😂
@loopernoodling
5 ай бұрын
Brandon, do you ever get any stick for being such an Anglophile (at least militarily)? I can understand Civil War LARPers, but we were your colonial overlords! 'Getting stick' is UK slang for being the target of hostility - doesn't have to be physical, just receiving verbal complaints would count as getting stick.
@danielfilippov7354
4 ай бұрын
My personal advice-dont do that pause, like you're looking for a way how to put it. That "eh uh(the pause, at 3:06-3:10) basically it's going to be the king". You come off as less genuine and trying to use someone else's speech fashion as your own, however popular it may be.
@istvansipos9940
5 ай бұрын
Any officer in this space-time pocket of history, who inspired the men with badass weaponry? I don't mean an action hero murder machine actually using all his weapons all the time. Command was way more important, after all. I mean just a crazy-well armed weirdo leading his men, like the sword carrying officer of WW2. Thanks
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
Well, one comes to mind: Spanish admiral Blas de Lezo. He is most famous for the Battle of Cartagena de Indias, in which he managed to defeat an extremely large British force, all whilst the Spanish garrison had but a fraction of the resources. Unfortunately, he died from his wounds during that battle: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blas_de_Lezo A Spanish frigate currently is named after him: F-102 Blas de Lezo.
@Jackiejinx1798
5 ай бұрын
UwU
@zargonfuture4046
5 ай бұрын
Why use the Americanism "load out" if is not the terminology of the time…if you're interested in the historical facts? It would be basically be to "equip a soldier/officer".
@skipsmoyer4574
5 ай бұрын
Good video, my officer miniatures all get done by regulation
@WaxenPaken
5 ай бұрын
Hello
@cmw458
5 ай бұрын
They were supposed to use their soldiers for ranged combat lol
@conorboyle6975
4 ай бұрын
Title about 18th century officer, thumbnail shows 19th century officer...
@BrandonF
4 ай бұрын
The video itself is about the Long 18th Century, which includes the Napoleonic Wars. I just couldn't fit that into the title while keeping it pithy!
@conorboyle6975
3 ай бұрын
@@BrandonF Ah I understand totally, I was just teasing. Sorry if I came off as an annoying pedant :D
@BrandonF
3 ай бұрын
@@conorboyle6975 No trouble- it's a term that a lot of people are not familiar with. I should probably make a video some day to address it.
@THECHEESELORD69
5 ай бұрын
Well I would assume that a gun was standard at that point.
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
In the Spanish Army it became standard either right prior or during the Napoleonic Wars.
@THECHEESELORD69
5 ай бұрын
@@podemosurss8316 oh good!
@podemosurss8316
5 ай бұрын
@@THECHEESELORD69 But there's also the fact that the Peninsular war was extremely high-intensity compared with other theatres, and full of ambushes and so on, so officers needed weapons for self-defense.
@THECHEESELORD69
5 ай бұрын
@@podemosurss8316 oh we’re talk about officers? I was just asking in general. A friend of mine said that they used bananas.
@Marinealver
5 ай бұрын
Officers don't fight the enemy. They tell the men in line to fight the enemy.
@podemosurss8316
4 ай бұрын
Sometimes they have to defend themselves, though. Like, for instance, when they're waging a high-intensity campaign in a montainous area.
@danielhodge1203
4 ай бұрын
I hope I'm not the first one to point out that when referring to the 1800's one should use 19th century as a descriptive. If you are talking about history then sound like a proper historian please.
@BrandonF
4 ай бұрын
I am referring to the Long 18th Century- I just don't use the full descriptor in the title because it would make the title unwieldy for KZitem. But I do make sure to specify in the video itself.
@elshebactm6769
5 ай бұрын
🗿👍
@salty4496
5 ай бұрын
:)
@chinasucks6666
5 ай бұрын
Video on sappers and/or blunderbuss?
@ellisonms
5 ай бұрын
Your words echo the truths down the ages. When I was at the US Marine Corps Basic School, one of the instructors was none other than (then) Captain Oliver North, just back from a posting as a company commander in Viet Nam. When asked why he carried a shotgun in country, he stated something like "The shotgun was for personal defense. My main weapon was my platoons and squads....my men. I directed them towards the enemy. If I got caught up in the fight personally I lost "the big picture". If I had to actually USE my shotgun, we had already lost."
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
Semper Fi! It sounds like you were at TBS a few years before I was! Remember the saying? "The best view of TBS is in your rear-view mirror!" 🤣
@am1na1996
5 ай бұрын
What about a more junior commissioned officers tho. I find it hard to believe that a lieutenant leading a platoon into combat would think the same, no?
@ellisonms
5 ай бұрын
@@am1na1996 A junior officer leading his men into combat HAS to think the same way. HIS weapon is his platoon. His job is to try to keep his men as safe as possible while he directs them into position to destroy the enemy. If he looses the big picture of what is going on around him and what he needs to do to control the situation he and his men will loose and, even worse, get hurt or die. It is VERY easy to get involved in personal combat when the bad guy down the road is shooting at you. That is why Captain North carried that shotgun. A shotgun has a limited range. Captain North didn't even have the capability to get into personal combat with a bad guy who was more than 40 yards away (which is not very far when nearly every military rifle on either side is easily effective out to 10 times that distance and MUCH more when it is in the hands of someone who knows how to shoot). So, since he couldn't get into the fight directly he could concentrate on directing his men to fight for him. It is even the same for a squad leader.
@vcorkleth
5 ай бұрын
I imagine an officer has leveled up his inventory capacity enough to carry 4 pistols, 1 saber, 1 dirk, 1 claymore, 1 musket, 2 blunderbusses, 1 mace, 2 hatchets, 1 standard issue tea set, 10 health potions, 8 mana potions, 30 cooked lobsters (or lobbys), and maybe a teleport back to base spell.
@Creature_Ice
5 ай бұрын
Officer with blunderbuss? Lol
@bubbles581
5 ай бұрын
@@Creature_Icethat's what you picked out of all that? 😅
@yakumoyukari4405
5 ай бұрын
@@bubbles581 Guts and Blackpowder private server, blud forgets about M16
@niknight99
5 ай бұрын
You forgot the bagpipes and longbow in that loadout.
@daswordofgork9823
5 ай бұрын
Why would an officer need a 6 foot long two handed sword?
@lucasmatiasdelaguilamacdon7798
5 ай бұрын
Everyone knows that Sargeant Majors carry a Nockgun!! Now that’s soldiering!!!
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
Only if they're over the hills and far away. 😊
@Capt.Leslie.V
5 ай бұрын
It Says so in the scriptures!!
@NobleKorhedron
Ай бұрын
That's "Nock VOLLEY gun", lad. 😉🤣
@Yandarval
5 ай бұрын
An officers weapon has always been his troops. If the officer is fighting, he is no commanding the troops. This has been the way for centuries. its still taught like that today. Its surprising that people think otherwise.
@SEAZNDragon
5 ай бұрын
Likely influence by the maneuver warfare of the 20th Century where even senior officers had to be more hands on to keep up with the troops.
@michalsoukup1021
5 ай бұрын
Exactly. The exception is when you have officers on the platoon level. Armour branch officer WILL fight his tank, as well as command his platoon or company to point out an example.
@roballen8431
5 ай бұрын
Officer weapons are for self defense.otherwise they wouldn t carry them
@Riceball01
5 ай бұрын
Which is also why the idea of leading from the front is such a ridiculous notion. Since an officer's primary duty is to lead their men, being up in front and potentially getting caught in the fighting is not the way to do it.
@jonc4403
5 ай бұрын
Except in the air. Pilots are almost always officers.
@Khalith
5 ай бұрын
You mean officers didn’t charge in on a horse swinging a sword and killing enemy grunts!? I am so disillusioned right now.
@datkhornedog899
5 ай бұрын
Unless it's a cavalry officer?
@mikkonahkola1590
5 ай бұрын
Some did, in some wars. There was the "Great Northern War" that was basically Swedish Empire vs everyone else, say... There was that one officer of the Swedish army who'd do things like sneak into a Russian general's field kitchen and listen to their breakfast discussions, and then either sneak or fight his way out... or just cause general mayhem. Oh and he kept a diary that's survived. It's got things like, "Found an encamped troop of cossacks today. Shot three, dispatched ten with my sword, the rest escaped. Captured 60 horses and various supplies." Occasionally he even got some number, up to about a platoon's worth very occasionally, of various helpers, but mostly not. Got promotions by basically sneaking back to Swedish-controlled territory and bringing his notes on what he'd seen... Well yes, Tapani (Finnish) / Stefan (other languages) Löfving was basically at fiction protagonist levels in just about everything according to those diaries of his. Though it's pretty much verified that he caused a lot of trouble for the Russians during various wars but eventually managed to die of old age (in 1777, aged 88) during peacetime.
@podemosurss8316
4 ай бұрын
Cavalry officers did.
@johanmilde
4 ай бұрын
We definitely have a lot of examples of cavalry officers getting straight into the thick of the fighting, but at least in the 17th century we also see a lot of examples of why commanders might have preferred them to focus on command and battlefield conditions instead - the usefulness of your cavalry is rather limited if they ride straight off the battlefield, chasing the remnants of some enemy cavalry they smashed into, never to return.
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
A FAST 25 minutes Brandon! Well done and very informative as usual! For what it's worth, when I was going through the Basic School for (Marine) Officers despite our eventual military occupational specialty (MOS) we were trained as infantry officers. As such we were told an infantry officer's duty wasn't really to fight, but to direct the fighting, that is manage the violence. The issue weapon at the time (1975) was the M1911A1, the old .45 automatic. And it was issued for the officer's personal protectionif needed, not as an offensive weapon. However the most recently concluded conflict being the Vietnam War the combat veteran officers told us that in reality they'd armed themselves as they saw fit, and usually so they didn't stand out from the rest. Some carried M-16's, some riot shotguns, so we can see some things didn't change too much from the 18th Century to the present! On the other hand some found carrying a rifle or shotgun a bit of a headache and stuck with the pistol although they'd hide it, the bad guys knew Americann officers carried pistols! What they do now I have no idea. Again, it's always enjoyable when you post! Thanks!
@Riceball01
5 ай бұрын
On a similar note regarding standing, in order not to stand out, officers in the field would not wear their rank insignia This was because back in the '90s, when I was in, Marine officers were only authorized shiny rank insignia, they didn't get subdued ones like us enlisted wore or like Amry officers wore, so they would not wear any at all when in the field. And we, the enlisted, were not supposed to salute officers in the field either, another sure fire way to get an officer killed by an observant enemy sniper. Although any sniper worth their salt who saw a Marine out in the field with no rank insignia but who looks to be at least in their 30s is most likely not a buck private.
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
@@Riceball01 Good post! In fact you reminded me of an article in the "Marine Corps Gazette" published back in the 1980s concerning Marine officers shiny insignia. In fact, there was a photo with the article taken at just the right angle which showed a Marine captain's "railroad track" insignia reflecting sunlight like an arc lamp! The thrust of the article was "Gents, we REALLY should do something about this!" Did they ever? I don't know. If anyone knows I love to hear about it. NOT saluting officers in the field on the other hand goes WAY back, at least to WW2 and possibly to WW1.
@Riceball01
5 ай бұрын
@@wayneantoniazzi2706 When I was in during the mid-90s they still hadn't done anything about it. The solution was for officers to simply not wear their rank insignia in the field, that's it. If subdued/blackened rank insignias existed and were authorized, I've never seen any of the officer in my unit ever wear them. Granted, I was a Reservist in a Wing unit so we didn't really go out to the field outside of CAX very often, but my unit did have something like 4 - 6 officers (for a light company sized unit) so if they were an option than I'd think that at least of one of them would have worn a set. I think that now a days officers might simply have their rank (either insignia or title/name) embroidered onto a patch that they'd stick on their plate carriers instead of wearing anything on their collars or pinning to the front of their flak vests. I got out well before plate carriers became a thing but based on pictures I've seen online, name patches (like a pilot's) are now authorized and have the owner's name, blood type, USMC & EGA in the middle, with (I think) rank on them. Personally, I think that the main reason why the Corps never adopted subdued/blackened rank insignia for officers is because the Army does. I personally the Corps does a lot of things the way it does just to be different from the Army, or vice versa. We roll our sleeves on our cammies straight up with the inside showing, the Army rolls there's so the camo patten still shows. We blouse over our pants, the Army allows their troops to tuck their pants into their boots. We're Marines, we can't be seen doing things the same way the Army does things.😂
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
@@Riceball01 Man, I got a chuckle out of that! I'm reminded of the old aphorism: "The US Army is the most decentralized of the services, the US Navy is THE most centralized, and the Marine Corps NEVER changes!" 🤣 You know, a quick and easy solution to the rank isignia problem (and in my day it was plain old green utilities, nothing exotic) would have been a trip to a hobby shop for some small bottles of Testors paints and some brushes. Flat brown (or green) for covering gold insignia and flat black for silver. Every officer typically has some rank insiginia that's a bit worn so painting it wouldn't have been a problem. By the way, I decided to "Swing with the Wing!" myself, a 7208, if they even have that MOS anyore. Thanks for serving and keeping the faith! Semper Fi!
@Riceball01
5 ай бұрын
@@wayneantoniazzi2706 7208? Looks like we did similar things, I was a 7242 with the DASC. I was a part of MASS-6 det. A out Miramar, but in your day they would have been in El Toro. Did you get a lot of people not knowing what exactly your MOS did? From the recruiter all the way up to MOS school nobody knew what a 7242 was or did. But once I got to air school I knew that I'd like the MOS. Semper fi, brother!
@Kyuschi
5 ай бұрын
You say officer's didn't carry a primary or ranged weapon but on the contrary, the officer has a hundred ranged weapons. they're called his men.
@JBils41
5 ай бұрын
Thankfully an officer wasn’t required to carry them however…
@PiterburgCowboy
5 ай бұрын
I follow you since ..idk ever... that you still have less than 700k subs for the quality of the information you are dishing out. Holy crap KZitem algo...
@mccoyfleming6664
5 ай бұрын
I LOVE HOLDFAST SO DAMNED MUCH hi brandon, good to see you!
@martinhg98
5 ай бұрын
Dress swords are myth in moast cases. A sword can be butiful and functunal. And spadroons were very popular thay are nimble good at giving point and can cut weel. The bad 1796 swords are outfiters swords. Swords made to 100% pass "profing" but are thus way to bendy and light.
@TheIrishvolunteer
5 ай бұрын
Great video as always! Would you ever possibly consider producing a video related to the Irish rebellion of 1798? There are dozens of areas you can choose from, there was a brutal crackdown of the rebellion, the French invasion, the numerous ingenious victories won by the under-equipped rebels, and many more!
@wayneantoniazzi2706
5 ай бұрын
That's a great idea! Maybe he can come up with something by next Saint Patrick's Day? "Hurrah me boys for FREEDOM! It's the rising of the moon!"
@Countvondabar
5 ай бұрын
Rule Britannia!
@poil8351
5 ай бұрын
I suppose i heavily depended on which army and which branch the officer came from. Some armies were somewhat different. Strangely the ottoman army was probably one of the armies with the most standardized unfiorms and equipment of course depending on unit and period.
@Britishgrendier
5 ай бұрын
Love your channel
@informitas0117
3 ай бұрын
Pretty sure it still lands in snobbish behavior. We don't see unarmed NCO today. Sure, something like a major might not carry a rifle, but they are also not on the front. People weren't stupid back then. They knew an extra shot was an extra chance at victory, but it looked too much like labor, probably.
Пікірлер: 273