Napoleonic Cavalry Combat & Tactics

This video gives insights in cavalry combat and tactics during the era of Napoleon. This includes Cavalry Types, Forms of Combat, Formations, Organization, Principles and many more.
Napoleon in the cover by vonKickass.
Link to History Gaming Verified: / @historygamev
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon - / mhv
» paypal donation - www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
»» MERCHANDISE - SPOILS OF WAR ««
» shop - www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi...
»» SOCIAL MEDIA ««
» minds.com - www.minds.com/militaryhistory...
» facebook - / milhistoryvisualized
» twitter - / milhivisualized
» twitch - / militaryhistoryvisualized
» SOURCES «
Rothenberg Gunther E.: The Art of Warfare in the Age of Napoleon
Nosworthy, Brent: Battle Tactics of Napoleon and his Enemies
Bruce, Robert B.; Dickie, Iain; Kiley, Kevin; Pavkovic, Michael F.; Schneid, Frederick C.: Fighting Techniques of the Napoleonic Age 1792 - 1815: Equipment, Combat Skills, and Tactics
Ortenburg, Georg: Waffen der Revolutionskriege 1792-1848
Planert, Ute: Die Kriege der Französischen Revoluation und Napoleons. Beginn einer neuen Ära der europäischen Kriegsgeschichte oder Weiterwirken der Vergangenheit? In: Beyrau, Dietrich; Hochgeschwender, Michael; Langewiesche, Dieter (Hrsg.):Formen des Krieges. Von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart, S. 149-162
Rogers, H.C.B.: Napoleon und seine Armee / Napoleon’s Army
Browing, Peter: The Changing Nature of Warfare. The Development of Land Warfare from 1792 to 1945
Citino, Robert M.: The German Way of War
Chandler, David: The Art of Warfare in the Age of Marlborough
Philip J. Haythornthwaite: Weapons & Equipment Of The Napoleonic Wars
Hughes, B. P.: Firepower - Weapon Effectiveness on the Battlefield, 1630-1850
Lind, William S.: Maneuver; in: Margiotta, Franklin (ed): Brassey’s Encyclopedia of Land Forces and Warfare, p. 661-667
AskHistorians: How does a commander screen his army?
/ how_does_a_commander_s...
Russell, Jill R.: With rifle and bibliography: General Mattis on professional reading
www.strifeblog.org/2013/05/07/...

[@patchesohoolihan666]

So light cavalry used lightsabers?

[@b1laxson]

While Lancers had the longest shafts.

[@neilwilson5785]

And Pre-industrial Light and Magic.

[@kanonierable]

In fact they used heavy sabers.

[@jackofshadows8538]

Whenever I've been in 'Militaria' stores I have always noticed that 'Cavalry sabres' were often shorter and most equipment for cavalry was designed to be lighter and less burdensome as a horse has enough of a burden carrying a man without carrying his pack too? If sabres were longer then they were thinner as the balance on a saddle is not so troublesome when on two feet. Also, there is the consideration of the horse itself when it comes to swinging a sabre at an enemy with a horse's head and body thrashing around. 'Piercing' would be preferable to 'slashing', wouldn't you say? When an arm is raised, then your centre of balance is lost and a mere nudge would likely knock you from the saddle!

[@FriendoftheDork]

@@jackofshadows8538 It's true that heavy cavalry would often stab with their sabers rather than chop. But militairy saddles were made to keep the soldiers in the saddle if possible, not letting them be vulnerable to nudges.

[@EpichistoryTv]

'Cavalry is useful before, during, and after the battle', as Napoleon put it! Really interesting video, I've been reading about Napoleonic tactics on and off for 20 years, but still learned something new from this. On a small technical point, in English the straight heavy cavalry weapon would be called a sword, not a sabre, as it is not curved. Also, on skirmishers, one of their main purposes is obviously to stop the enemy doing the same to you - to prevent them scouting, harassing your battle line, etc. Once one side is using skirmishers, the other side has to introduce them as a defensive measure.

[@Mikapaintings]

The British rifle men were superior to any smooth bore musket vultigeur (not sure on the spelling)

[@N_Sbn_Ur]

@@Mikapaintings Voltigeur. [Voltijeo].

[@mr.stotruppen8724]

Technically correct, but as time went by - especially in the latter half of the 19th century - the term "sabre" came to refer to any military sword, regardless of blade shape or edge geometry.

[@GodSlayerHD]

Very interesting video. I actually made an in-depth Napoleon light infantry tactics video if anyone wants to check it out

[@ScipioWasHere]

The Great Khan is looking down upon this comment nodding with a slight grin on his face

[@carl6589]

My dad is a modern day hussar in the swedish army :). But they use helicopters instead.

[@maxxxstrong4577]

carfel the best That's OP!

[@NiclaS03K]

Fallskärmsjägarna är husarer! Livregementets husarer.

[@k.t.1641]

He must be going for a technological victory.

[@StudM01]

He can still play Sabaton while he rides around in the helicopter. If he's a Hussar, he's earned it.

[@kadinbarbee6013]

Going for that victory royal

[@Wolfeson28]

2:26 The British Dragoons were actually a special case here. During the mid-1700s, the British converted all of their cavalry (referred to in the British Army as "horse") units to Dragoons, in order to pay them on a lower scale (a legacy of the Dragoon's mounted infantry origins). So all British cavalry units in the Napoleonic period were officially called Dragoons, but the name was more of a financial scam than any reflection on their actual functions. The British distinction between Light and Heavy Dragoons was the truly functional one, since it reflected which set of roles a particular unit was intended to fulfill.

[@Albukhshi]

Yeah, the army converted them all into dragoons in 1768, though the process began in 1748. Light dragoon companies were added to regiments in IIRC 1752 or 1753, but full-regiments come only with the Seven Years War, and indeed were meant to be the analogues to the continents' hussars.

[@hannibalburgers477]

lmao

[@imkeepingmynamethis]

Source?

[@95DarkFire]

@@imkeepingmynamethis en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragoon#Early_history_and_role , near the end.

[@ShaDoW-uc7bn]

9:59 “Any disturbance in the force...” Love it

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

;) I kept the jokes rather subtle this time.

[@Turiargov]

Unlike Lucasfilm. ;-)

[@ironstarofmordian7098]

so if there is an awakening it will cause all sorts of chaos like two crap movies a possible flop and one slightly mediocre film

[@EpaminondastheGreat]

LOL!

[@rnw94501]

My godfather was one of the last men trained to be horse mounted in the US cavalry. He told me that when you charge down foot soldiers, ride parallel or slightly in front of them and backhand slash them in the face. If you try slashing from behind you will strike their packs.

[@greenflagracing7067]

26th Cav?

[@EarlJohn61]

Frankly, the stereotypical US cavalry were more like Dragoons or Light Horse soldiers, than true cavalry. Ride into battle, then, quickly, dismount and fight on foot...

[@Legitpenguins99]

@@EarlJohn61 that would make sense. We've always had a tradition of "the individual marksmen" that still purists to this very day from decades of frontier warfare. It's most easily seen in the Springfield 1903 being set up as more of a target rifle than a combat rifle with it's complex and tiny sights, etc. There's no way a soldier on horseback could get off a decent shot up to the army's standards from a moving horse

[@marufcanloglu7309]

moo

[@LordBaltimore009]

If you ain't CAV you ain't. A salute to the great soldiers of US CAV. I trained with 1/12 CAV from Ft. Hood, TX. They showed excellent maneuvers. Thumbs up!!!!

[@arsenal-slr9552]

Add this to your featured playlist. Its one of your best ever, and I dont even read about Napoleonic times much at all.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

good point!

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

and thx!

[@tirdad4026]

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized Please enable Persian subtitles for all your programs

[@fakshen1973]

I was thinking "how could he not see the parallels between modern combined arms and cavalry tactics?" Then you dropped it in right at the end. Well played, sir. Thanks for the enlightening videos.

[@zivbenmoshe1585]

Best Cavalry explanation video ever made, Thank You

[@antivalidisme5669]

Was eagerly waiting for the one, and holly molly this is really great! Rarely seen such a clear, dense and well organized 20+ min video. Great job!

[@aaronpaul9188]

For more on this topic, I highly recommend Rory Muir's "Tactics and Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" It does an excellent job exploring the tactics, doctrine, and practical use of all branches of land forces during the war, as well as comparisons between mostly French and English. It also deals with raising regiments, procurement, command and control, and expectations while on maneuver. For the Napoelonic wars, perhaps more than anything previous, displayed the vital necessity of the war of maneuver. Napoleon's superior organization and supply allowed him to move faster, and concentrate his army more successfully than any other nation, enabling him to defeat empires. A key example of this is the difference between his Italian Campaign of 1796/97 and the Ulm campaign of 1805. In the first, Napoleon was able to concentrate his army and defeat the austrians in detail. The austrians thought they learned their lesson, and kept their army far more concetrated for the Ulm Campaign. The result was Napoleon being able to outmaneuver and entrap the entire austrain army.

[@jacobeberhardt1649]

I like the Reichskangaroo being the symbol for "Not Crazy Enough".

[@manuelmartin2472]

Great video! Thanks for all the information. I just want to add one point regarding the use of cavalry against artillery: The problem of these attacks was often that the squadrons had no real possibility to destroy the captured guns. According to “Keegan (1976): The face of battle”, during the Waterloo battle, artillery men were often fleeing towards nearby friendly infantry columns when facing a cavalry charge. The cavalry was therefore getting the ground with only few casualties but were unable to do any harm to the abandoned guns with just sabers equipped. A common practice during this time was to use nails to seal the touch holes of the guns but therefore a cavalry man has to get off his horse what many refused to do as a sense of status. If no infantry unit was following the cavalry charge to deal with the guns, the squadrons had to leave the captured canons to go on for further tasks. This gave time for the artillery men to get back to their position and continuing their work and made the attack quite useless. Of course this was just possible if the gunners got aware of the charge in time.

[@shelonnikgrumantov5061]

Superb observation of the Napoleonic wars cavalry in less than 25 minutes, would not believe this is possible, many thanks! As regards the cavalry attacking the infantry - there was a lesser known in the West retreat of the Neverovsky division to Smolensk under constant attacks of the French cavalry. The nuances were that: 1) at least 2/3 of the soldiers and a majority of the officers of the Russian division were just recruited/ never saw an action; 2) they were attacked by probably the best and most experienced part of the best of the world cavalry - led by probably the best cavalry commander f the time Murat; 3) there were 2 French cavalrymen per one Russian infantryman; 4) there were in total at least 40 French charges during the whole day of the retreat. French attacked relentlessly and bravely and managed in some cases (on the turns of the road, etc.) to chip off some small formations of the Russians but the main body of the division (to remind - for a majority of its members this was the first real action) was like a steel wall. Moreover, Neverovsky managed to send his artillery ahead and plotted an ambush upon the French cavalry! Following which the French gave up. They later complained that their horses were “too tired” to continue. Hmm, the Neverovsky division covered the same way by foot under the constant attacks (and marched a twice longer way than the French cavalry the day before). The next day the depleted but still highly motivated Neverovsky division repelled numerous attacks of the French forces (again, substantially exceeding them in numbers) at Smolensk covering the deployment of the main Russian forces. Many consider this successful retreat as a critical point that did not allow Napoleon to trap the Russians at Smolensk and thus to destroy the Russian army (he had s substantial superiority in numbers at that time). Neverovsky, in my view, is one of the most outstanding and forgotten heroes of the Napoleonic wars - he was a truly “soldiers’ general” explaining to his soldiers every maneuver and caring about them in and out a battle. The soldiers paid back with the outmost trust.

[@alexeigirard7899]

Russians are tough, you can't defeat them easily! 💪 Later, winter got the French army, as others decades after. 😁

[@CorePathway]

Nope. Winter was still the VIP

[@rushyahr7767]

You do a good job portraying historical French military tactics, and I like it. The French have such a rich military history.

[@irongeneral7861]

I'm in love with the beige background you used; it's very soothing/comforting to the eyes! Once again you've outdone yourself with regards to the quality of your videos

[@Riceball01]

Lloyd would approve.

[@jackofshadows8538]

"Doesn't like beige? He's NO SON OF MINE!"

[@rgs7885]

He hugs our eyes.

[@1994fishcake]

When your playing Napoleon Total War and you forget to put your troops into square formation before a cavalry charge.

[@hoplite6164]

when you haven't researched square yet so you position three separate units into a triangle

[@GodSlayerHD]

Very interesting video. I actually made an in-depth Napoleon light infantry tactics video if anyone wants to check it out

[@BlackHawk2b]

@@hoplite6164 But... why not a square then ?

[@hoplite6164]

@@BlackHawk2b takes less units

[@BlackHawk2b]

​@@hoplite6164 Yeah sure but I find it funny ^^

[@dannyscott14]

This was really interesting. The stuff about cavalry vs cavalry in particular. I spend a lot of time inventing fantasy worlds etc... and I like to have realistic warfare in them, this is a nice bit of knowledge to have for that purpose.

[@QuantumRipple]

That moment you realise you were playing mount and blade in exactly the right way

[@rorycraft5453]

Nice information on calvary and brings to mind how cinema misrepresents calvary charges. However, the movie Waterloo showed the folly of French Cuirassers charging battle hardened infantry without infantry support. There was also a good scene in Waterloo in which the Scottish Greys tangled with French lancers. I like your videos, keep up the good work!

[@figuraobscuraful]

I was told if you are past theyr lances it is like killing rabbits (Uxbridge afaik)

[@stephencody6088]

Being a child of the cold war I've often neglected studying the Napoleonic era over more modern conflicts.Thanks for explaining this in a clear connected manner.

[@divaybishnoi2773]

Love the way you organise points.

[@sgtrpcommand3778]

Wow, what a fantastic video! That answered so many questions I had about cavalry. Also, the icons used were amazing as always. Thanks for a really good video, MHV.

[@illiminatieoverlordgurglek140]

Who the hell would dislike this? It's is really, really good. Very educational and yet also highly entertaining! Exactly what I look for on KZbin. Thank you so much for taking the time and effort to put this together! Instantly subscribed.

[@commissarcactus1513]

Excellent video with a great conclusion. I knew very little about this subject before, but this really explains cavalry neatly.

[@ThePerfectRed]

It should be added that cavalry - particularly heavy cavalry - was extremely expensive to maintain. Only the larger nations could afford it in substantial numbers. For example, the Sardinian and later Italian Bersaglieri (light infantry) was founded to compensate for expensive cavalry.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

yeah, I cut quite a lot, the French also had to acquire a lot of Austrian and other horses, because they lacked quite a lot.

[@REgamesplayer]

But it does no make sense. What is inherently more expensive to maintain in heavy cavalry than the light one?

[@barthoving2053]

Did the heavy cavalry still use horses specifically bred for the charge? It would explain part of the cost and gives a reason for the cavalry performance at Waterloo, as the French probably did not have enough of those warhorses left. when they rapidly rebuild their army. Light cavalry probably could make use of basic riding horses which were also used in the civilian sector.

[@REgamesplayer]

That is not that maintenance means. It would be equipment cost. To maintain it means to support. To support heavy cavalry should be essentially the same as to support light cavalry. Sure, horses might eat a little more, maybe those units are more prestigious and thus are getting paid better, but those are such neglible costs that they are not worth mentioning. Heavy costs incurs when nation needs serial crafted items. Cost of something significantly drops down when nation establish proper infrastructure to create such items en mass. I do not see how those horses could be more costly. Horse is a horse. It will fuck with other horses just as well, thus ensuring numbers. It will grow the same as other horses. Maybe due to size it will eat little bit more, but that is meaningless. It is a horse, not a king. The only real price increase could come from need to armor their heavy cavalry, but once again, not all of them were armored to begin with. Furthermore, armor is not that expensive. We are not talking about full body armor of knights. At that time, medium armor like of Roman legions were most widespread. Saying that Nepaleon era nations could not afford that Roman empire could produce en mass is just an insult to armies of that time.

[@barthoving2053]

A horse is not a horse as a dog is not a dog. You have different breeds for different purposes. If the breed is rarer the cost to buy is higher. Just look up modern horse trading. Prices go from around a thousand dollar to 50 million dollar. As horses need to be replaced the maintenance is higher if you've more expensive horses to replace. Furthermore some breeds of horses require more maintenance than other. For an simple example some horses you can leave in the rain without problems, others need to stay in warm stables or get sick. And about scaling the economy during peace battle horses do not get bred much as the demand is limited. In war the demand rises but the breeders are then at war and then it still takes a couple of years to get a functional horse.

[@Wallyworld30]

Was starting to worry about you. Great to see a new video from MHV!

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

yeah, fell a bit off the radar and that video took 40 hours.. new record.

[@sturm3d]

It really was a great summary, imho one of your best pieces actually - comprehensive, yet to the point. It is good to see that you keep focused on doing what you seem to be doing best. Only fly in the ointment is the lack of more historical examples to flesh out the statements and conclusions that are made. But of course it would even require much more time to include these. Thanks for uploading, it is very clear that many hours were spent into research and production!

[@shawn-cc5wt]

my favourite video by you so far. not only is the time period much more interesting for me than ww2, but its also very informative and has great visualization. keep up the good work! :)

[@alexandersarchives9615]

Excellent video! Also, love that you cite sources during the video. And now I have some new books to read.

[@Dagsschiller]

I really liked this video, loved the comparison with tanks at the end!

[@johndoerayme7064]

Excellent video essay, it's always truly worth watching your content. Keep up the good work :)

[@aaronvenia6193]

Magnificent. It's just amazing that this keeps getting better and better.

[@Yoedric]

That video was really well explained and illustrated, good job !

[@joaquinmig]

One of your best videos! Top quality :)

[@dotista2008]

I'd love to watch others videos from Napoleonic era !! Plz :D

[@Moh-dn8dg]

Video with uniforms :D

[@Titus-as-the-Roman]

Nice presentation, informative, the Napoleonic wars is something that was greatly lacking in an already poor school history class in the U.S. (for reasons I don't understand [accurate] history (and geography) was and is a low priority in our primary school system).

[@Aszod96]

Amazing work! i look forward to seeing more Napoleonic videos in the future!!!

[@9559ns]

A unit of Currasier and a unit of Royal Dragoons spot one another, on a hot summer day in northern France. They form dense orderly lines opposite ends of a fallow field, waiting for the charge, only 500 meters apart. From both sides the call is given the horses start! First with a leisurely walk, then to a trot, then they gallop! By the time they reach fifty meters the hoof falls are so quick, it is as if their horses are flying o'er the dusty ground. The men draw their blades, glinting in the hot sun, their warcries join the the deafening thunder of the charge. Then at ten meters the horses come to as hard a stop one can expect from horses in formation. At three meters both lines are stopped cold. The men tentatively lower their weapons and look to their officers. "Uh... shit." Says the English Colonel. "Hey, umm... Ugh, do any of you frenchies speak English?" The French Colonel comes forward, "Ouais, a bit." "Great, great... look I kinda saw this going differently in my head" spoke the Englishman scratching his scraggly beard. "I also thought this would be a bit more..." the Frenchman gives a shrug "/dramatic/." "Perhaps", piped up the French Colonel, "Perhaps we should back up and try again?" The English Colonel looked to the ground, tipped up his cap wiping away the sweat accumulating on his brow, and shifted in his saddle. "It would just feel */weird/* now." "Ouais, it would indeed" "Maybe we should both back up and then at a hundred meters..." "...We both turn about face and go our separate ways. Forget this ever happened." "Exactly, toodles my good man." "Adieu." ~*THE END*~

[@RandomExlcusiveTM]

This played out Realistically. Perhaps they could have exchanged cigarettes and gifts as WW1.

[@peterlynch1458]

The TV version would end in piles of dead horses and men while survivors recklessly leap over the piles to stab each other. Critics would never stop talking about how "realistic" the scene is.

[@henriqueoliveira5123]

Except the English Colonel would exclamate: "Oh, bollocks..." instead of "Uh shit"

[@miracleyang3048]

Wait a minute I thought the heavy cavalry horses Especially the cuirassier were more aggressive than normal horses and well trained and will charge anyway, There is many first hand accounts of horses charging each other I think it's just as bad of a misconception to say that horses never charge another mass of horses of infantry

[@romank4905]

If only real wars ended like this ...

[@airnt]

in 1760 Ridinger, a riding master writes about the officers compressing the line form the sides by riding their horses sideways to the middle, this will compress the line to the point where it will bulge forward int he middle, greatly aiding in the horses committing to the attack. similarly the horse will be very keen to hide behind the horse next to it when charging, and this is why an echelon attack is much more likely to be effective, as the animals want to follow the herd under stress, and yet avoid the enemy, this can result in a surge that rampages through the enemy, in particular if the leading horses are well selected, also the first three strides of gallop are almost impossible for the horse to shy or stop, so that might be part of why a formation might strike the gallop really late. also a formation only striking the canter at 20-30 yards might be seen to 'have attacked in trot' especially in high corn, like at waterloo. another factor in the 'shoot only once' factor is the smokescreen the infantry will lay in front of themselves and not be able to target at all after the first volley, the horses suddenly appearing from the mist. the reason it is probably not very effective to charge cavalry with cavalry in the napoleonic era is the lack of wedge formations, so often employed from about 1000-1650 (and earlier in Macedonian and Byzantine cavalry), wedge formations allow the horses to litteraly split the enemy units mass, and if done right is not hard to do with actual horses. there are very clear depictions (chronicles of the crusades 1470s france, for instance) of these wedges being used cav vs cav. this comes down to 3 factors: -lances, armour and riding quality. all three of those things fell out of favour around 1650 with the lack of localized horse supply, allowing much greater education of the animals. a well trained horse with an armoured rider with a couched lance can control enemy weapons in front of his horses head, that is less easy for a sabre armed trooper. The lances used in the napoleonic era are much shorter and lighter and are held in the middle, greatly reducing range. the wedge is therefore able to allow the horses to work as a snowplough, something hardly possible for later cavalry. it has to be said that gunfire was employed en masse from at least 1400 onward, (and first used on the European battlefield in 1340) and fully plate armoured cavalry does not crop up until 1360, and continues until at least 1644 in the west and later int he east. so gunfire cannot be the reason for the disappearance for this type of tactic, but horse supply correlates much better.

[@Taeerom]

The wedge was not used, as the movies and computer games show, as a plough. It was in many ways similar to the echelon in the attack, weaker but more flexible than a line. The great advantage of the wedge (or rhombus, which is basically the same), is that you can turn the formation 90 degrees really fast. At the time the wedge was popular, the cavalry charge against an infantry formation was a game of chicken. If the foot broke formation, the horse could charge home. But if the foot stead fast, the horse had to break off. With a line formation, you get a better charge, but the formation is slow to turn. That means you have to break off the charge early. What you can do with a wedge, or rhombus, is to switch the leading horse on order. So that the tip of the rhumbus turns into the side, and one of the sides turns into the tip. This makes the wedge and rhumbos formations to be able to get closer to the enemy before calling off the charge and turn. Making it much harder for the enemy officers to keep their men steady in their formations. And if the lead horse sees a crack in the infantry, he knows he can charge home.

[@aitorrodriguez9070]

Great job, one of your best. I am looking forward to watching Infantry Combat and Tactics during Napoleon ;)

[@Lyvey]

I love your Napoleonic videos, very interesting time period

[@GMP-Official]

I have years figuring out this. Thanks for the great video and content!

[@blaisegrabiak3245]

Great video! Well done very detailed and author references greatly appreciated. Thanks for your fine efforts!

[@gan9055]

Genuinely a good video. Interesting and informative.

[@chrisgott7766]

Well done. I have read and played a lot on this topic and this is a great summation.

[@rickyalexander459]

Very nice video. Thanks for your effort. Love studying this era.

[@wordsmithgmxch]

Excellent installment!!!

[@CaptainHaddocck]

Simply a great educative video! Thank you sir!

[@stephenhill9820]

Excellent work as usual!

[@andreweby8445]

Great video as always. You should cover pike and shot era tacts. Theyve always confused and interested me

[@nomoregoodlife1255]

incredible video thanks!

[@BF4ClanTBS]

Thank you for going back to your roots I waited for a good video since a whilen

[@damo7667]

nice! best I've seen for a while. Thanks!

[@jeremyhereford7389]

Thank you for covering this topic :)

[@dbzshadow1440]

This is a video ive been hoping for for a looong time!

[@yuvaben-younes5814]

Great video, your work seems well researched and you answered a lot of questions i always had about cavalry with sources for more details. +1 subscriber

[@RHampton]

This is an outstanding briefing. Thank you.

[@stefanbinder5515]

Thank you, very interesting and well presented!

[@garryfromwallmart4263]

Love your videos and how consistent you are with backing everything up with source material. 99% of the "Fact" spewers on both here and netflix could learn alot from you. Kudos! And loved the finnish. During the era, it was still a bit like the medieval battles. 80% of all losses occur during the rout. No cavalry to give chase means no actual losses to the enemy.

[@TheLoyalOfficer]

Excellent video! Bravo.

[@Duececoupe]

Fantastic work!

[@fenixdown22]

Excellent video, thank you.

[@renardgrise]

Excellent video. Thanks!

[@ENIGMAXII2112]

Very in depth, thank you Sir.

[@greenmushroom4258]

This is great!! Do more from this era!

[@maciejniedzielski7496]

22:20Very well explained video, thanks. Btw in the "War and Peace" BBC serie there is one scene were French infantry stops cavalery charge

[@szablotukpolski5201]

Dobry komentarz :)w temacie innych historycznych walk i wielkiej historii SZABLi polskiej zapraszam więcej jest tuu szablotłuk polski

[@TheAgent056]

Oh God, I was *just* looking up cavalry tactics the other day on KZbin, and was unimpressed by the search results. You're a freaking godsent.

[@timneeno4784]

Very interesting. You fill in a lot of gaps. Thanks!

[@IllicitGreen]

top notch quality, thank you!

[@indodan03]

Great research, very interesting! Thank you

[@mbe102]

I was wondering why I hadn't watched one of your videos in what seemed like a long time. I didn't have the bell icon clicked! Sorry about that man! I really missed your content!!!

[@qwertyzxcvbn6929]

oh boy after a few months time to binge once more cooked up a great dinner, nothing to make it even better than great viewing!

[@O-soba_mask]

Thanks for teaching us the use of cavalry

[@leonrobinson2053]

Very good, loved it

[@richardcharay7788]

Interesting and informative, thanks!

[@syntheretique385]

Your pronunciation of French expression is great. Especially "coup de grâce" Thank you

[@vaclav_fejt]

I have Thomas Anderson's book "Sturmartillerie - Spearhead of the Infantry" and when you mentioned horse artillery, I thought "ah, Sturmgeschütz". As you said here, as you said about the Blitz-eh, Bewegungskrieg, nothing new.

[@pioneirohill8493]

Some how like the isis campaigns in iraq, syria. With huge numbers of pick ups, heavy caliber mounted machine guns, mobile mortars crews, etc.

[@JaM-R2TR4]

great video, you should do more about Napoleonic warfare

[@mr.c.3760]

This was great, one of the better vids you've produced this year

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thx. well, I only did a few and this one took 40 hours...

[@HDSME]

I have see most of your vedios finally i believe this is your master piece something about how you put it together Excellant easy to understand very enjoyable !

[@soumyajitsanyal4146]

This is amazing. Thank you

[@seanmccluskey9586]

This is outstanding.

[@manilajohn0182]

1st class video. Really nice.

[@georgepuedel6892]

This explained a thousand battle reports after the fact to me. Thank you, that was incredible scholarship.

[@Maximator1804]

Good video. I will show this video to my history teacher. We are currently talking about the napoleonic wars.

[@andretorres75]

Thank you very much for this great video with valuable information. Cheers! o7

[@ShaDoW-uc7bn]

I’m commenting before watching the video, but I already know that it will be a great video! Also, Napoleon Total War :)

[@JdeMonster]

Especially with the NTW3 mod

[@Kruppt808]

I will spring for it when it goes on steam sale!

[@Cubcariboo]

Darthmod all the way. 700 hours of play...damn you Steam! Lol

[@patricofritz4094]

Sehr gut great explanation of cavalry in the Napoleonic wars

[@matta5498]

@ 9:59 Any disturbance in the force could have serious consequences. It made my star wars geekness smile.

[@daprochaska9677]

awesome vid!

[@davidschlageter5962]

Outstanding job!!!!

[@gowensbach2998]

Weedus, good idea! I usually put them way on the flanks to attempt to take out enemy artillery as quick as possible, or to intercept broken units, and chase them down too.

[@nikdaw12]

"Epic dash of the Polish light horse at Samosierra Pass"

[@szablotukpolski5201]

Dobry komentarz :)w temacie innych historycznych walk i wielkiej historii SZABLi polskiej zapraszam więcej jest tuu szablotłuk polski

[@firstconsul7286]

That has been my favourite military action ever since I saw a video on it. Somosierra was absolutely badass.

[@ieuanhunt552]

Polish cavalry has always been terrifying. They were not always well led or had a just cause but damn there must be something in the blood. Poles are such good cavalry men.

[@silasmoser301]

Thank you very much for this video.

[@jayludus7737]

Very informative thank you

[@Kruppt808]

Hmmm, your a wizard.... I just bought a couple of Napoleonic Wars books this weekend and now you come out with a ridiculously awesome/infotainment video. If your doing 20+ min vids in 2018 the final piece in my life is in place.😂

[@AlternityGM]

Good stuff. Very educational. I find the battle tactics of the 18th & 19th centuries to be fascinating. During the Napoleonic wars it was a constant chess game of infantry vs cavalry vs artilery. Infantry could deploy in square to repel cavalry but that made them vulnerable to artillery. Cavalry could devastate a line of infantry especially if attacked on the flank. Infantry usually deployed in line to attack or defend against infantry. Artillery could usually repel infantry & cavalry but not without infantry support. If cavalry & infantry got close enough or to the rear of artillery, they could be devastating.

[@rorystockley5969]

Very interesting, this period of time is fascinating. Plus your pronunciation of 'gallop' makes me laugh every time, so that's a plus.

[@Otokichi786]

This presentation puts Custer's quote about Amerindian cavalry as "the finest light cavalry in the world" into perspective. It also answers some questions I had about John Mosby's pistol-armed Confederate cavalry vs. Union cavalry, comparing their saber charges as being as ineffective "as if they were wielding cornstalks." Cavalry vs. infantry armed with magazine rifles made Napoleon's assertion about battle a thing of the past.