The Highland Charge - The Famous Shock Tactic of the Scottish Clans

[@SandRhomanHistory]

EDIT: CORRECTION: In the intro I say 1764 instead of 1746. It was a typo in the script. The lower third and the subtitles are correct though. Later in the video the date is also correct in the voiceover. A special thanks to all our Patreons. Thank you for the support. If you're interested in becoming a Patreon, check out www.patreon.com/sandrhomanhistory We usually post BTC-updates, previews and content polls.

[@robertfaucher3750]

Wait wasn't there a highland charge against Jackson in the Battle of New Orleans in the war of 1812?

[@yogsothoth7594]

I believe a lot of historians are pretty dubious about the impact of the idea of the thrust to the right drill. And if you consider for a moment that you're in that position of someone rushing you down with a sword and shield would you really ignore them and aim at the guy charging the man on your right?

[@brokenbridge6316]

This was a nice look into an incredible tactic. Something like this isn't talked about enough.

[@alfrancisbuada2591]

Next do the Filipino-American War especially with the Moros down in Mindanao who also charged head first like the Highlanders and did not fear death

[@randyross5630]

I hated the Outlanders Portrayal of Ross'! That Ross Character wasn't even wearing the Ross Tartar! Back Story! The Mackenzie Clan took the Place of the Great Clan Ross because the 1st Stuart King married the Chief of the Great Clan Ross the 4th Earl of Ross Hugh Ross (1st to take on the surname long before the advent of Surnames) daughter, and than the Stuarts took the Earlship of Ross from the Ross' causing a War! And the Mackenzies who's Chief was from the Ross Bloodline (from X amount of Generations back) and was like our Evil Twin decided to Side with the Stuarts and Replace us! And eventually the Great Clan Ross turned into Clan Ross all the Gentry of the Great Clan Ross and than later as per orders of the Stuart Crown after the advent of Surnames for everyone by law (with the Ross' having a Surname before the Stuarts were even Kings) made the Commonality of the Ross Family who could not Prove their Pedigree by Paperwork Mackenzies! Ross' were Sword Masters at that point, and the Gentry, but than again by the Time of the Outlander many Ross' had fallen into Commonality, but if you Look at Ross-shire (that the Out Lander show doesn't mention although some of it takes place in Ross-shire the former Earldom of Ross) Ross' lived in the Prime Real-estate of the Highlands, and we were for generations before the Richest and Most Powerful Family in the Highlands! And that Ross character in the Outlander would of surely had the Money or Means to Afford wearing Ross Colors. The Only Realistic Part is how a Ross shows up and automatically becomes trusted and is basically an officers under Jamie, specially in the context of fighting for the Stuarts, because although Ross' and Stuarts had a Rocky Start, but we were the Matriarchs of the Royal Stuart Bloodline and not by Choice though, and eventually after the Next Generations War over it resulting in Ross-shire being Decimated after a Decade of War we eventually became Half Good, I say Half Good because Ross' seemed to pick a Side whenever multiple Stuarts claimed the Throne and if we picked right we were Good, if we Picked Wrong, we weren't as Good, and Ross' were extremely well known Allies of the Stuarts and the Gentry, but him being Fat and Dressed in None Ross Colors (the Ross Character in Out Lander) is just insulting, and although Clan Ross and Clan Mackenzie had some Issues, allot of the Hierarchy of Clan Mackenzie was from the Ross Bloodline! Which the Chief of Mackenzie was actually trying to use after the 5th Earl of Ross died (Married to Princess Maud and set for the Throne, why the Stuart took his Sister the Countess Ross turned Queen Consort as his 2nd Wife to Concrete his Claims to the Throne and his Bloodlines Royal Lines, yes back than Earls were Considered Royals), and since the Earls of Ross had been abolished by the Crown, and the 4th Earl of Ross' 2nd Son becoming just Count Ross (instead of the Earl of Ross) the Mackenzie Chief was saying he should be the Earl of Ross citing how he came from the Bloodline of the Earls of Ross! And the Only Ross thing you see or hear in that show is some Fat Guy Dressed in Plain Colors! And it was just a very Poor Representation of Ross, and a Poor Representation of Ross-shire X amount of Episode are in (whenever they are North of Inverness) yet never mention that! Won't even show are Tartar, while many Highlanders call Ross' the Original Highlanders! We were Clan Arias (Anrias) before the Great Clan Ross, and from a Bloodline of the Scoti Kings of Old! the once War Master of Scotland the Chief of Clan Arias the 1st Earl of Ross Fearchar the Son of the Priest was a very Formative Leader, bringing Ross and Moray fully under the Crown, and brining the Viking Lairds to Heel, stealing their Lands and Gold! You don't get more Highlander than Ross! And I found that Show Insulting!

[@free_at_last8141]

To see this tactic in use today, observe the outcome of an average football match in Scotland.

[@riograndedosulball248]

I have seen Scottish football matches being best described as "angry, bitter football"

[@NobleKorhedron]

Good one, @free_at_last! #CracksUpLaughing 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

[@gabrielcanejo187]

"You Call This a Football Riot?!? Come on Boys, Let's Take Them to School!!"

[@Yh-kg8fr]

I think the last recorded bayonet charge was actually performed by Scottish troops in Iraq in 04 😂

[@davidwells4903]

Or in Scottish bars when their team loses😊

[@Ryuzaki-JongUn]

Dramatized TV and Hollywood are a dumbing machine when it comes to accurate historical narratives. Thank you guys for keeping it within the realm of critical research, no matter how limited, it's still gold dust in comparison to commercial drama

[@thenoblepoptart]

I utterly despise the washed out colors they put in every historical film too. I watched the movie 300 again recently remembered having loved it as a kid, but I couldn’t stand the piss-colored filter they put over EVERY SCENE. After watching Barry Lyndon I can’t go back to this desaturated bullshit!!!

[@chrisbeer5685]

While the highland charge specifically died out, the penchant for shock tactics stayed with scottish highland troops under British service, such as the last recorded Bayonet charge performed by the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders... in Iraq in 2004.

[@ianmacewan9416]

So what is a shock tactic?

[@larryalvares1369]

@@ianmacewan9416it’s in the name: you shock your enemy with surprise

[@johnkerr4551]

Bet those Iraqis shat themselves though.

[@MartinNicol-bk7ny]

Mmm didna no tht

[@MartinNicol-bk7ny]

​mmm let hink putting bum in ah hoof pub 😂😂😂😂

[@joshuafrimpong244]

The Highland charge comes from an old Gaelic tactic, used by both Irish and Scottish clans alike to break the opposing line of battle, used in battles like The Battle of the Ford of the Biscuits and the Battle of Carrickfergus in Ireland, and the Battle of Melrose and the Battle of Torran Dubh in Scotland to varying levels

[@ruzzsverion2728]

Ffs its just a standard v charge used by barbarian cultures since the bronze age.

[@joshuafrimpong244]

@@ruzzsverion2728 I mean when they started to implement rifles in the charge

[@rachdarastrix5251]

It was the Highlanders who invented the classic shot and pike tactics that were being used in a previous era. The way the Jaccobites were doing it was just a result of falling back upon them because they had less ammo than the enemy. Main difference is pikes stopped being used because they had bayonets, and they were using Highland Targes instead of the Rotella. Both of which served the same purpose. Get in close without getting shot then get past the pikemen. Warfare is primarily using range first then finishing the enemy off in melee. Targes fell out of use when instead of trying to get close one could simply use their own musket. And the addition of the bayonet allows one to be both the pikemen the shooter and the swordsman all in 1. By the time of Culloden the Jacobites had acquired enough muskets off their enemies that they were using more of them than they were shield and sword, which is the reason it took longer before they charged. Who charges first depends entirely on who runs out of ammo first. Because back then when you ran out of ammo you couldn't just run off to hide in a foxhole and wait for a truck or helicopter to bring you more. Not that I think that's what they do.

[@Emil-Antonowsky]

Today the highland charge is a shock tactic used by Royal Mail.

[@xtramail4909]

I really appreciate you covering this. It’s nice to hear someone with a non Scottish accent take interest in our history

[@Stormcloakvictory]

Sounds almost like some old Celtic warfare. Create chaos, chants and imposing the enemy, shock charge with very fierce and deadly close quarters battle. Heavily depending on moral and chaos within enemy lines. swift victory or swift defeat. it's power and weakness both being individual autonomy in the midst of battle.

[@twiddlerat9920]

Highland warfare was almost entirely shock tactics which was why some still used two handed claymores up to the 1680s

[@JamesAustin-1982]

​@@twiddlerat9920 Pitched battles maybe, but pitched battles were rare for that exact reason. Most Highland warfare (overall) was at range with bows.

[@GAMER123GAMING]

@@JamesAustin-1982 Bows in 1500-1600s?

[@thorfinnravenfeeder]

It was indeed, Alasdair McColla who first, used the "Highland Charge" in battle, in what is now, Northern Ireland. He brought the tactic with him to Scotland, where he used it to great effect during the "War of The Three Kingdoms". He was not only, a great Scottish hero, and a fearsome fighter himself, but also, a tactical genius. It was McColla who, was behind all the victories of James Graham, but the Norman aristocracy refused to acknowledge that, falsely attributing his successes to Graham. The truth about who was the real leader was revealed, the moment McColla left Graham to his own devices, and he was immediately defeated and forced to flee the country. Reputedly, a giant of a man, McColla was never defeated in combat, and never defeated in battle, but was forced to surrender by the rest of an army he was fighting for in Ireland, routing and leaving him and his men surrounded. He was murdered by a Norman aristocrat whilst a prisoner, supposedly, as an act of revenge. To suggest, Scots retreated to charge again if, the initial charge failed, is to totally misunderstand what, the tactic involved, and the reasons behind it's use. It started with a headlong charge en masse, halting approx. 25 yards from the enemy and firing a mass musket volley, then casting aside the muskets, drawing swords, and charging headlong into the enemy ranks before, they had time to re-order themselves following the volley. If it failed, the Scots routed, but that rarely happened, as it was a highly effective tactic. As "Graham's" campaign demonstrated, McColla was by no means, a one trick pony, and he saved Graham's arse repeatedly with his prowess in battle, on one occasion holding one flank single-handed for approx. 15 minutes before, relief arrived. The folk tales about him are legendary, but difficult to dismiss, given his well-recorded track record in combat. McColla is almost, forgotten in modern Scotland, yet he is second only, to Artur McAedan, King of Mannan, as the greatest of Scotland's heroes. We owe the "Highland Charge" to McColla, and it's about time, this was widely acknowledged.

[@Pendura-o2i]

This is a very dubious tactic. The Ottomans and the Indians were very weak at it.

[@brucecollins641]

@thorfinnravenravenfeeder9101....allistair mccolla was scottish. born on the island of colonsay scotland in 1610 died 1647. if anything he took the highland charge to ireland, or it may have entered ireland with the earlier scottish gallowglass warrior clans in the 1200s. he never brought in from ireland it was already here.

[@Derna1804]

The reason for the Highland charge as a tactic was probably because firearms were expensive and the Highlands were poor and sparsely populated. It was about maximizing the advantages of the Highlanders and minimizing the disadvantages. By keeping the exchange of fire as short as possible, the few firearms available could be used in one effective volley. Despite the sword itself being at a range disadvantage to the bayonet, the Highlanders themselves had more experience in hand to hand combat than most soldiers, and swords are very impressive-looking weapons.

[@ioangogov2993]

I agree om all except the sword range disadvantage to a bayonet

[@Derna1804]

@@ioangogov2993 The muskets were long enough for troops to attack men on horseback with cavalry sabers. It's a more than two foot reach advantage. The Highlanders would have to parry past several bayonets to get into the formation because the muskets were long enough for each man to strike in support of his comrades.

[@giacomoromano8842]

​@@Derna1804reason for why the bayonet was an extremely effective weapon in mass formation, but if the charge was effective and the line lost cohesion, the highlander would have found themselves at a advantage in most "1 on 1" situations, thanks to the unyielding nature of a musket. True though that the musket has a reach advantage on a sword, but it's not a big deal, considering how cumbersome and heavy the musket itself is, it was a poor replacement for a true spear.

[@Derna1804]

@@giacomoromano8842 I will grant you that a sword has advantages a bayonet does not. I don't have any training with swords, but I was trained to fight with a rifle and bayonet and I wouldn't underestimate bayonets at all. While it is certainly true that the musket is less of a spear than a spear, it's surprising how well you can wield a firearm as a spear and club. You can't change your direction of attack in an instant like with a spear, instead you take advantage of the weight of the weapon and your body weight for momentum. A "parry" with a musket isn't so much of a parry as an attack with the weight of the weapon to clear the way for a thrust, the soldier posts his thigh and leaps forward into the attack, so that bayonet is going where it's going, you're not stopping it with a sword or even a targe, you'd have to get out of the way entirely. If the formation armed with muskets is breaking up, so is the formation armed with swords, and the reach advantage in that situation becomes critical as men are able to aid their fellows. And we're not talking about people scattered to the four winds at this point, you're liable to trip over somebody or fall on your archibald trying to avoid a bayonet thrust. I suppose the HEMA community hasn't really taken an interest in bayonet fighting because it would be difficult to safely do a close approximation, and even if you did pull it off, anyone watching would be more horrified than impressed. I can only recall one instance in warfare of the period where infantry dropped their muskets in favor of sword sidearms and it was some cheeky Hungarian infantry charging insanely into a swirling cavalry melee during the Seven Years War (it didn't work out) the best evidence we have is that they probably favored their bayonets for a reason.

[@aldoscotzi2261]

Not that sparsely populated. More so now but not in the 15-18th centuries. Almost every Glen and Strath, had thriving populations and forces. That’s why there are 10s of millions of Highland diaspora around the world. For example MacDonald of Islay could easily raise 10,000 warriors. Mackay of Caithness actually raised his own clan force of 5,000 to come down from Caithness (in the far uninhabited north west these days) to face off against the MacDonalds. Others like the the Gordon’s and Campbells could easily raise 6,000. Duncan Forbes actually wrote to the British Government stating all the Highland Chiefs could raise over 100,000 fighting men. Something that would never happen due to geography and complex feuds.

[@nasgor22]

the thumbnail goes incredibly hard

[@micheldesjardins8813]

At the Battle of the Plains of Abraham in 1759 (in Quebec), the 78th Fraser's highlanders of the british army, when the french retreated in disarray, they dropped their muskets and charged the french with their claymore swords.

[@tricky1992000]

Culloden was a terrible place to use the highland charge, I've visited the battle site, it was 500 metres of marshy slightly uphil terrain, that would exhaust and distort any massed charge.

[@phillipdavies1081]

I've also been and absolutely it was terrible ground to have picked, the British on the other hand probably would have chosen it from their point of view. Particularly with the low wall that as I recall ran down the right flank of the Scots.

[@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311]

Lord George Murray advised against fighting there at all, he was overridden by Charles Stuart who didn't really have a clue about anything military.

[@lucario2188]

​@@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311to be fair to Charles retreating was no longer a option.

[@MartinNicol-bk7ny]

@@tricky1992000 tht how their stood their if it wisna like tht eh brit wd of ran awy

[@debbiegilmour6171]

I wouldn't say Culloden proved to be the death knell of the highland charge. Charges can still work in modern times to close a short distance to your foe, especially when under the cover of smoke and supporting suppressive fire. In fact, hand to hand still proves to be one of the most lethal forms of combat. At the one place on the field where a Scottish charge actually met an English line, the English crumpled, just as the had at Prestonpans and Falkirk the previous year. I know there was this whole thing about how the English were newly drilled to cover the man on their right by pointing their bayonet right to bypass the Scots' shields but the effect this had was muted. Culloden was more a demonstration in what can happen when your lines of communique get shot out.

[@waynenash6008]

At Culloden, the charge only reached the ,, British,, lines on the Jacobite right wing, where Scottish,, regiments were posted,, they never crumpled though they took many casualties,,they fought the highlanders off,

[@debbiegilmour6171]

@@waynenash6008 Barrell's and DeJean's regiments took the brunt of the highland charge on the right flank. Neither of those regiments were Scottish.

[@sky37blue]

Exactly, at the one point where the Highlanders actually got to the English lines, they smashed right through. They were only able to be repelled because of local superiority due to the centre and left of the Jacobite line not reaching the government line because they started further away

[@JonathanToolonie]

"There seems to be an orange hedge coming towards us." "No sir, that would be the Scotts."

[@Mrkabrat]

Blackadder reference I see

[@33hhrr]

As I recall, the Ottoman Janissaries made use of a similar tactic throughout the 17th century, and was actually rather effective against Austrian pike and shot formations on a number of occasions. Even in instances where the Ottomans lost the battle they could typically cause great losses amongst Austrian infantry by engaging in melee combat, which the latter wasn't trained or equipped to handle.

[@mnk9073]

The Highland charge is essentially just a cavalry charge on foot: If your enemy flinches and breaks they are utterly screwed, if they don't flinch and hold firm you are utterly screwed.

[@empyreal_lord]

Probably more screwed than the cavalry would be since you don't have the horses' mass & inertia, or their speed if running away becomes a good idea.

[@Jake-dh9qk]

It's just a glorified human wave tactic

[@andreydragomirov8559]

You seem to underestimate both the cavalry and infantry charges. Many such charges in history were devastating even if the enemy stood firm - this is why armies were doing them for thousands of years and this is why the first instinct of anyone who faced such a charge was to run!

[@mnk9073]

@@andreydragomirov8559 Three milennia of history have proven that if the phalanx/shildtron/pikeblock/square/whatever holds then the cavalry is f*cked because no amount of training can convince a horse to impale itself on a pointy stick. Every successful cavalry charge in history was either done from the rear or the flank or against a flinching enemy, there's not a single example where cavalry managed to take on a solid formation from the front in melee and win.

[@therat1117]

@@mnk9073 There are plenty of examples from the Mediaeval period of cavalry charging into the front of infantry and winning. Cavalry that consisted of head-to-toe armoured professional soldiers with giant f-off weapons and giant f-off armoured war horses against levy infantry of suspect morale. But when they tried that and the infantry didn't break, generally the knights were slaughtered, per the Battle of the Golden Spurs. This became enough of a known issue that the English, for example, often deployed their knights *on foot* to better resist enemy charges and mow down enemy infantry. Charging even disciplined infantry often worked - at the Battle of Kosovo Serbian knights broke the centre and right Ottoman infantry, which outnumbered the Serbians and was regarded as unusually well-disciplined for its time, but the Serbian coalition ended up having to retreat because the Ottoman left held fast and the Ottoman infantry after rallying were too much for the Serban knights and infantry once the charge halted.

[@chriscarty2308]

Bannerlord F1 + F3

[@AnarchistGrandpa]

Yes

[@florix7889]

a man of culture

[@lolasdm6959]

Most tactical bannerlord player

[@tommybelanger92]

F1 + F4 For real strategoi.

[@YrCleddyf]

I will translate for the non gamers: Bannerlord Everyone! + Charge!

[@Philtopy]

It’s kinda understandable why it was so popular for such a long time. It is easy to understand for even the most dense peasant. „Just run into the enemy and hack at him with all you got.“ and it’s also easy to train. It suited the Scottish brovado and grit perfectly.

[@ottovonbearsmark8876]

It’s kinda similar in theory to the French Attack Column in the Coalition Wars. Both designed to break the enemy main line’s morale via the threat of charge. Both worked better against less experienced/trained troops, and ran into trouble facing well drilled rapid fire and/or artillery. The Scots did it with speed and shock, the French did it with concentrated weight of numbers.

[@darbyohara]

At prestonpans british accounts depicted savage casualties as a result of the highland charge - arms/legs hacked off, men gashed shoulder to waist, etc.

[@Dimitriterrorman]

It was crazy when robert de bruce shouted "ITS HIGHLAND CHARGING TIME" and highland charged the english forces to death!

[@danielthompson6207]

❤

[@loyalpiper]

The highland charge was not used at bannockburn, that's completely diffrent tactics.

[@Dimitriterrorman]

@loyalpiper it's a passive buff that all Scottish can use without the animation

[@cybergoth2002]

speaking of movie depictions of the battle of culloden, I can highly recommend the 1964 film. It's shot and edited to look like a contemporary war documentary

[@wesleyjarboe9571]

No tactic works forever. That includes the highland charge. Counter-tactics will eventually be developed, regardless of how effective the tactic is at the start. The Japanese revived the tactic in WW2, renaming it the "Banzai charge." It didn't work any better for them than it did for Bonnie Prince Charlie.

[@andreydragomirov8559]

The Highlanders were not the only ones to perform such an infantry charge at the time: the Swedish Carolean Army was famous for that, too, although they performed in a much more sophisticated manner and were wildly successful in a great number of encounters all across Europe against various standing armies and for about half a century. This was part of the Swedish military doctrine of the time, "Gå-På" - the doctrine of constantly being on the offensive and never ceasing the attacks - in which cavalry and artillery were also incorporated, while the infantry would charge in tight formations and with swords, pikes, or bayonets of their own after the stage was set with a musket and artillery fire. Their tactics actually worked against unbroken enemy formations to a great effect.

[@giorgiociaravolol1998]

Yeah I was thinking the same. I was surprised by the lack of use of guns from the scots and the fact they laid down after shooting. With more organization, I'm pretty sure they would be devastating on larger scale

[@therat1117]

@@giorgiociaravolol1998 Where would they get the guns? You're talking about poor tenant farmers in the Highlands drafted for war. They can get a sword or polearm the local blacksmith made and a shield they made themselves, but that's about it. Guns would have to be bought in a major settlement, are expensive, difficult to maintain, and require ammunition and powder, which would also have to be bought.

[@Philtopy]

When rushing B becomes not just a tactic but a mindset.

[@jbb4105]

It’s a way of life

[@thENDweDIE]

If only the Scotts were aware of a particular successful Native American tactic...known as, "Running the Line"... Were a single brave and beast, world most quietly encroach as much as possible without notice...yet regardless how near or far, would begin their charge... Not at the enemy, rather along the lanth of their front line, where they would begin a volley, one man at a time... When the brave's own version of the Highland Charge had begun, catching the enemy with their pants down... Very few braves were intrusted with this dudy by the Chief, for obvious reasons. This isn't something you'd wanna half-ass..!! Given the madness it must have taken not only to accept, but to actually complete...these men will forever be worthy of more respect and admiration, than I may ever muster..!!

[@willowdelosrios4326]

The Gauls, Galatians, and other ancient Celtic peoples had a similar tactic; the Roman’s referred to it as the *tumultus*, in which the Celtic warriors, many fighting bare-chested or completely nude save for the torcs they wore for protection and good luck, would charge headlong at their enemies, accompanied by the blowing of carnyx - large metal war horns that sounded like the cries of wild animals -, and literally leaping into the ranks of the enemy. Like the highland charge, it was terribly effective, routing the armies of the Romans, Greeks, and Anatolians, among others, and reaching all the way to Rome to demand tribute from the city.

[@meilinchan7314]

Banzai.

[@the_peacetime_volunteer]

My 7th Great Grandfather, John Steedman was a Jacobite in The Stonywood Battalion, a lowlander unit supporting the Highlanders. He survived Culloden, fled to America, and later served in the Continental army.

[@debbiegilmour6171]

Yhe lowlander/highlander division is a falsehood. It's divide and conquer 101.

[@dungeonsanddobbers2683]

Did he, aye?

[@alexanderchenf1]

Highland charge became a thing when English firepower overwhelmed that of the Scotts. You charge for a chance or you lose for certain

[@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311]

These wars weren't really English vs. Scottish at all, at the time of the Jacobites, about half of Scotland supported the Hanoverians and a lot of people in England supported the Jacobites. Scots fought on both sides in all of these battles he mentioned.

[@JohnJohnson-pq4qz]

That's an interesting point and is the traditional view(and has worked for poorly armed troops through out history at times) but there is a fairly recent book that came out after a new excavation of the Culloden battle field that took a very different view. One aspect i remember was the English had trained specifically for the tactic and when the Scots broke the lines (or purposefully gave way) the English forced them into a flexible pocket so they could fire on them from nearly all sides.

[@alexanderchenf1]

Smart. So the English pulled the center back while held the flanks, making a U-shape fire zone. Make sense @@JohnJohnson-pq4qz

[@JohnJohnson-pq4qz]

@@alexanderchenf1 That was my recollection, I'm still trying to remember the book title.

[@cantbanme8971]

The conflict wasn't a war between "Scotland" and "England", it was a dynastic struggle for the British throne were loyalties split along a number of religious, cultural and nationalistic lines.

[@aaronbasham6554]

Having gone through all the tactical videos on different types of {blank} charge, i find it hilarious that it always works perfectly, right up until an actually well lead or dug in army of professional troops shows up. Then there's always some level of "but it worked so effectively before" defense debate for the guys whose strategy was essentially get blobs together, shout your lungs out, then move forward into the enemy.

[@generalaigullletes5830]

You need not look past the Napoleonic era and usage of columnar forces to show that bayonet charge tactics *decided* many combats. You have a good point here that well-dug in and defended professionals armies will defeat charging forces... but how actually *common* is that example to happen? And what happens if (as utilized by great commanders such as Napoleon) combined arms of cavalry, artillery, and infantry are utilized to blunt the enemy before a final charge completely shatters their line and cohesion? it's only with the invention of modern massed firepower due to the accessibility of massed production during the Victorian age that we now fight without large blobs and do not utilize melee combat.

[@mabeSc]

Pike and Shot has to be one of the most boring eras in warfare in all of history... Even if two "professional" armies met in battle the battle would conclude with one side retreating in good order and the other not pursuing since both suffered catastrophic casualties.

[@aaronbasham6554]

@@generalaigullletes5830 the exact same thing happened throughout the ancient world up until even technically modernity.

[@Narjoso]

It would have been intresting if the highlanders had met the swedish carolinians who also specialized in marching quickly and sometimes even running to deliver one volley at 50 yards, then another one at 20 yards not stoping to reload but to draw their swords and charge the enemy with cold steal. tactic called "gå på"

[@gib59er56]

Indeed I am sure they did meet. Along with Danes and Norwegians. They became blood-brothers and intermarried. They were Vikings.

[@brandonwalker5011]

"They were vikings" wrong century

[@JamesAustin-1982]

They did. Many Highland Scots served under Adolphus.

[@Kamamura2]

If you have only poorly armed troops (pitchforks, scythes, some had swords, but not all, combined with few obsolete firearms), charging is the only option that is left to you - you must balance the training and the gear quality with sheer bloodlust and hope for the best. Of course, you need all the help you can get - bad weather, difficult terrain, night - to minimize the effect of the volleys you will have to suffer first. Scottish highland charge is not a tactic born out of genius and deliberation, but of dire need and despair.

[@artawhirler]

That's right. If melee weapons are all you have ( or mostly, anyway), then you have to get close enough to use them. A sword isn't much good at 200 yards.

[@debbiegilmour6171]

On the contrary, the jacobites were very well armed. In fact, the english took great pains to disarm Scotland after the uprising ended because they really didn't want to deal with something like that again. The Highland charge was just a very effective way of ripping your foe to bits and terrifying those unfortunate enough to survive it. It worked very very effectively at Prestonpans and Falkirk the year prior.

[@cwmyr]

The majority of highlanders would still use two handed axes (Dence axis, Leitht axis, tuaghan-chatha, Sparths, Lochaber axis, bardiches), jedwart stavis, morning stars etc. in the 18th century. Targeteers (and highland warriors with sword and shield should be understood as targeteers in the same 15th/16th century tradition as the Spanish rodoleros) only made up the front ranks. You would probably have to be a tacksman or above to afford a basket hilted broadsword. Also for the earlier period: The highland Scottish, more so than the Irish Gallowglass were famous archers in the 16th-17th century. I am not sure I would thus say they usually fought in tight formations. Two handed "claymores" and halflangs were often secondary weapons to yew longbows. This is also the outfit we see in the redshanks (Scottish mercenaries) in Ireland and what is described for Blàr nan Lèine. Sir Robert Gordon wrote in the 1620s: „They discharged their bows […] and their arrows being spent, they fly to their swords.“ This seems to be more of a light infantry type (tactically speaking). In fact we have a description from 1577: „...light footmen, well armed in shirtes of mayle, with bows and two-handed swords...“ .

[@joemahon3284]

The Irish started it in the Irish confederation wars. Alasdair Mac Colla and his Irish veterans. He joined The Marquess of Montrose, and won five famous victories in Scotland against larger government army's. Main tactic was to fire a volley, drop there muskets and charge full pelt into the terrified government troops. They routed multiple armies inflicting huge losses on them.

[@theDexMcHenry]

Absolutely. And you see this also in Irish Confederate cavalry tactics. When facing an opponent with a superiority in firearms, you don't want a stand up fight. You have to cross the killing ground as quickly as possible and get to hand to hand. The charge is a tactic of necessity.

[@grigoriskossyvakis2453]

Στην υπόδουλη στους Οθωμανούς Τούρκους Ελλάδα, από τα τέλη τού 15ου αιώνα, υπήρχε μιά ορεινή περιοχή στην Ήπειρο όπου κατοικούσαν οι περίφημοι Σουλιώτες. Εκείνοι για 150 χρόνια ήταν αήττητοι στους πολέμους με τους Τούρκους και χρησιμοποιούσαν τακτικές όμοιες με τούς Σκωτσέζους Χαίλάντερς ενώ παράλληλα ήταν φοβεροί νυκτομάχοι. Επίσης έπαιξαν σπουδαίο ρόλο στην μεγάλη Επανάσταση των Ελλήνων το 1821 με αρχηγό τον φημισμένο Μάρκο Μπότσαρη, για τον οποίο έχουν γράψει ύμνους ο Γάλλος 12:44 Βίκτορ Ουγκώ και ο Σκωτσέζος από την μητέρα του Λόρδος Βύρων.

[@brucecollins641]

@joemahon3284 the confederation wars were in the mid 1600s and were led by a scotsman alasdair mccolla. there would be highland charges before that. also, the irish learned it from the scottish gallowglass warrior clans of the 1200s.....then the later scottish redshanks..

[@davidkarunanithy8018]

But the Highlanders, using their famous charge, failed dismally at the battle of Dunkeld in 1689. On that fateful August day a single Lowland regiment of grim Presbyterian fanatics from Lanarkshire and Ayrshire, the famous Cameronians, stood their ground, held them at bay and broke the Jacobite resolve, even when outnumbered 4 to 1. When the Cameronians ran out of bullets, they stripped lead from the roof of Atholl House in Dunkeld to keep up their fire and with bitter tooth and nail house to house fighting.The battle deserves to be remembered more than it has, it was a truly dramatic and bloody encounter between two Scottish polar opposites. See here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jKLWYalnZrN-lZI

[@gib59er56]

Ah. What is the most bloody and bitter. Civil War. Tribe vs. tribe, Earl vs. Earl, North vs. South. Bitter and bloody. You know this well. You know your history very well sir.

[@loyalpiper]

Been to dunkeld and stood by the church, incredible to walk past the Coop there and the bridge and wonder what it would of been like. Fine example that the charge only works on open ground.

[@dungeonsanddobbers2683]

The Highland Charge is only famous because it was romanticised long after the Jacobite Rebellions, when people started getting nostalgic for Highland Nonsense. As far as I'm aware, the Highland Charged _failed_ more often than it ever succeeded, which is to be expected when your primary battle tactic is "Give farmers a sword and musket, then have them zerg rush the enemy"

[@acethesupervillain348]

I'd love to see this channel cover some of the battles of the American Revolution and War of 1812. There's a lot of myth and legend behind those wars, and not a lot of decent history.

[@eldorados_lost_searcher]

I'm not aware of many channels that use animation and maps like this one does for the time period, but Brandon F, Chris the Redcoat, and Far Off Station do some of that.

[@Dimitriterrorman]

Hey SandRhomanHistory if you like covering the times when gunpowder weapons werent of total control of the battlefield maybe you could cover some fights of the Hellenic revolution since there were many battles that ended with melee and many unconventional tactics too!

[@SillyGnome]

Watching this, I never realized how similar the highland charge was to the famous Carolean tactic of gå-på. I can’t help but wonder if there was any inspiration shared between the two

[@andreydragomirov8559]

Yeah, only that the Swedes did it better. I'm inclined to believe that the Swedes influenced the Scots in this regard as by that time the Swedish army was notorious all across Europe as being the best quality military of the time and pretty much everyone was trying to draw inspiration from them.

[@therat1117]

It's a response to similar conditions - the Swedes were dealing with low manpower and a general lack of resources, so they came up with a strategy that maximised breaking the enemy morale whilst using the fewest manpower and materiel resources possible, and drilled their troops to carry this out as efficiently as possible. Ditto the Highlanders. The problem with both was that when the army eventually encountered a force that did not break at the charge, which then resulted in unrecoverable casualties and the disintegration of the entire army, as at Culloden and Poltava.

[@andreydragomirov8559]

@@therat1117 , I agree with many of the things you've said, however, I must disagree with the notions that: the only purpose of a charge - whether cavalry or infantry - was to break the enemy's morale and if this didn't work, the charge always failed; that the Swedes relied exclusively on breaking the enemy morale with a charge; that the Swedes and the Scotts had the same problems and that the Swedes relied on using the fewest manpower possible. If the charge's sole purpose was to break the enemy morale, it wouldn't have been used for millennia prior, during, and after the period in question, as it is relatively easy to train an army to just stand its ground against a charge. But it's easier said than done. If the morale of the enemy didn't break, a charge could also break an enemy formation physically or could put the charging army in a better tactical position to continue the fighting against a disrupted and disorganised enemy formation. Prior to the Great Northern War (1700 - 1721) the Swedes were the foremost military power in Northern Europe and one of the Great Powers in all of Europe and they had managed to achieve this through various continuous reforms, improvements, and innovations in the course of more than a century. And during the first 10 years of that war they would face numerous times the standing armies of their many enemies - Denmark-Norway, Poland-Lithuania, Russia, Saxony - and would score a streak of victories against 2 to 4 times the odds. This was hardly accomplished by relying solely on breaking their enemies' morale "at the charge" - such extraordinary feats required far more than that. In most of their battles - such as Narva, Düna, Klissow, Grodno, Fraustadt, and others - the Swedes would have to deal with heavily entrenched and fortified defensive enemy positions, the enemy's morale wouldn't break at the charge, a general melee would ensue, and the battles would be long lasting and hard-fought, and yet they would win consistently and against all odds and be undefeated for 10 years. This was mainly due to Sweden having the best quality military force on the continent in every possible respect (the only thing the Swedish army was lacking compared to any other strong army was numbers). The Battle of Poltava (which is a battle the Swedes shouldn't have engaged in in the first place, as far as I am concerned) was only lost because: firstly, the Swedish army was decimated during the Russian Winter, during which about two-thirds of the soldiers died, the rest were exhausted, malnourished, and already strongly demoralised (see "the winter of 1708/09", the coldest and harshest for centuries); secondly, they were outnumbered 4 times; and thirdly, after the Swedish cavalry routed the Russian one, they continued to pursue them for too long, instead of turning back and hit the Russian infantry on the flanks and rear, which would almost certainly have decided the battle in Swedish favour. In the previous battle - at Lesnaya - a secondary Swedish army escorting a supply convoy was intercepted, ambushed, and surrounded from 3 sides by the main Russian army more than twice its size, and still the Russians failed to defeat the Swedes. And why so effective and efficient? Apart from pure quality, the Swedish military doctrine was not just to charge in order to break the enemy's morale, but to surprise the enemy, take the initiative, never lose it, and constantly keep the enemy on the back foot, and this was applied on all levels - from the individual training and drilling, through the organisational, tactical, logistical, and up to the strategic and command level. And that doctrine was to be implemented even in defence (like at Lesnaya) - forming up earlier than expected, fortifying earlier than expected, maneuvering into position earlier than expected, counterattacking earlier than expected, etc. Also, the Swedes relied not on deploying as few men as possible, but rather on suffering as few casualties as possible and not losing a battle, as their lack of manpower wouldn't allow them to replenish casualties as well as their enemies. And regarding the material resources, Sweden at that time didn't have a big problem with that, as whatever the Swedes couldn't produce themselves, they would acquire it via trading (they controlled the Baltic trade) or plunder in a war, especially after a victory in battle. So, the Swedish and Scottish situations, although having some similarities, were largely different. I would recommend that you go through all of the Swedish battles in the Great Northern War and see for yourself what was really going on back then and there...

[@wargriffin5]

@3:50 "Should the enemy stand firm, the Highlanders usually stopped just before the clash, retreated, and charged again later..." - Damn! I didn't know the British Isles had mountain gorillas. 😉

[@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311]

I'm sceptical of this claim I don't know of any battles where this happened.

[@cetus4449]

After reading the history of the Battle of Moore's Creek Bridge I have to say that it was not so much the last charge of the Scottish Highlanders, but a parody of it. It looked different than what you described in the video.

[@dungeonsanddobbers2683]

Yeah, IIRC it wasn't even actual Highlanders that were involved, but royalist colonists who had Scottish ancestry.

[@mirsad7]

Somebody in some famous movie "hit, run, hide, the highlander way".

[@Cab00se90]

Firstly, great video but you mentioned Killiecrankie. This is arguably the Highland Charge’s peak and the perfection of the tactic post-MacColla/pike. Jonathan Oates wrote an excellent book on Killiecrankie and there’s an open access PhD thesis by Graeme Millen on the Scots-Dutch Brigade’s role in the first Jacobite war. It has some interesting new insights.

[@paulkirk7120]

Millen's PhD thesis makes for a fantastic read and goes some way to clarify why Killiecrankie was a complete disaster for the Williamites.

[@omarab837]

You make good videos my friend. Nice to find them, I love history. Subbed.

[@ClarenceCochran-ne7du]

Culloden was a mistake made by Charles. It was also not in terrain suitable for a Highland Charge.

[@Ktf2309]

The whole uprising was a mistake

[@brucepowell7986]

the ground if a leader was paying attention was not suitable for a charge they should have moved off

[@johnpaulcc1]

fantastic narration, beautiful job, colonels I knew and a sm delta force operator, great job

[@bigsarge2085]

Fantastic documentary!

[@Lilitha11]

This seems about right. On the face of it, it seems like a high risk, high reward, type of attack.

[@andystewart3421]

Scotsman here who cringes at Braveheart and Medieval 2 Total War's tribal bullshit, I really appreciate your videos on Scottish military history. I would love a full series on the wars (plural) of independence, starting in 1286 (maybe before if you want to describe Alexander III's relationship with Edward I and any previous relevant context) up until 1357. I appreciate your work mate

[@jaygrundy2781]

What was tribal about the scots in medieval 2?

[@_--Reaper--_]

@@jaygrundy2781I was about to ask the same thing...

[@PapaJelly]

@@jaygrundy2781 Perhaps its the painted Scottish highlander units wearing kilts during catholic predominance.

[@timbow1833]

a charge like that should be used when advantageous terrain and distance factor in, doing so in muddy terrain at 500 yards seems like a very bad idea

[@AScottishCatholic]

Especially against bayonets and grapeshot.

[@timbow1833]

yes, sounds like they should have retreated, but bravery can lead to foolishness@@AScottishCatholic

[@michaelmallal9101]

It may be similar to Confederate charge, which also contained Scots.

[@Sneed-mi3ov]

The "scots irish" of the american south were not descended from scottish highlanders. They descended from lowland scots/northern english protestant, english speaking settlers in northern ireland who later went to the americas They were not highlanders. They were not jacobites. They supported the duke of cumberland. Nothing about the tactics of the confederate states of america have anything to do with the jacobites

[@MusMasi]

Since before the time of the ancient greeks, the sight of a mass of men wearing dresses and screaming as they charge towards you is a terrifying sight.

[@HrHaakon]

Especially if it's the greeks. The gay orgy takes few prisoners and ask fewer questions...

[@DPRK_Best_Korea]

​@@HrHaakonjokes aside, the Greeks were extremely opposed to homosexuality.

[@wegfarir1963]

This is the same tactic used by the Gauls. Amazing continuity from the Proto-Celts

[@anon2427]

Gauls were celts proper not proto celts

[@wegfarir1963]

@@anon2427 I already knew that.

[@jonathanaarhus224]

Yea, the British Army did pretty much everything they could to stack the deck in their favour, and they still had a tough time defeating the Highlanders. The Redcoats had to force the Highlanders onto marshy terrain and create two crossfire killzones, and Highlanders still came close to breaking through the firing line.

[@chrisgibson5267]

The Jacobites chose the battlefield at Culloden.

[@thegrantkennedy]

@fandabidozi tested the effectiveness of a targe against muskets and the results were surprising. It’s a great video, everyone should give it a watch

[@clintmoor422]

let me just say: the Scots overstate the importance of this tactic. the Brits understate it. SandRhoman did well though.

[@Thurnmourer]

Bit of a pointless comment to say Scots overstate and understate the tactic.

[@julianshepherd2038]

TV and films imply Highlanders didn't wash. They did.

[@seanmcnally6658]

I greatly enjoyed this and other videos you have done. They don’t have the usual nationalism or cultural sneer that many historical military videos have.

[@acewings221]

This is a little known historical fact, but Scottish people have drinking problems so the liquid courage probably helped make their charges more ferocious

[@SofaKingShit]

I can imagine that a group of staggering and stumbling drunks, some of the vomiting, some of them looking for their lost weapons, others who are in fact in the process of getting lost themselves, perhaps one or two who have urinated themselves and a few who are simply passing out must be a dreadful sight to behold.

[@acewings221]

@@SofaKingShit lol

[@gib59er56]

Yeah, you can add a bunch of others among heavy drinkers. Russians start drinking vodka at breakfast, Germans wash everything down with huge tankards of ale and in WW II they were given methamphetamine to keep the men blitzing on. When they ran out of morphine they created Methadone as well. Booze has been a part of war forever. Sailors...rum. on and on. I like your humor, but ya can stereotype everyone.

[@Votebritish]

What nationality are you?

[@allanshort8264]

​@@SofaKingShitI see from your comment that you have spent time in Dundee

[@Michael-sk4fj]

We still stand

[@theywantusdead373]

​@Lionsdontrulethejungle if you are going to did ye aye someone at least do it in the right context.

[@napolien1310]

Taking off clothing, and keep the white shirt, can be the same as what the Spanish called Camisado, which is a night attack, they keep the white shirt to distinguish a friend from foes.

[@knoll9812]

The plaid was heavy and slowed them down. Only well of had white shirts

[@darbyohara]

The effectiveness of a highland charge is heavily dependent on terrain, nature of the ground, and coordination across the line of attack

[@paulkirk7120]

And the quality of troops you face...

[@ludoviclemaignen9432]

You seem to suggest that bonnie Prince Charlie landed near Inverness when he actually landed on Eriskay in the outer Hebrides (west coast of Scotland)

[@michaelbrannonhuddleston5884]

Celtic war pre and post roman. Southern warfare in the war between the states. It succeeds when the enemy is surprised, not dug in, outflanked or outnumbered, before air and artillery, depended upon speed, short interval, enemy unable to retreat, weather and terrain.

[@Sneed-mi3ov]

The Highland Charge had nothing to do with "celtic warfare" The highland charge was first adpted in the mid 1600s and was not an "ancient battle technique" It was also not used by American southerners, because american southeners did not descend from highlanders. the "scots irish" in appalahia descended from Lowlanders and Northern englishmen who DESPISED the highlanders and supported the duke of cumberland

[@Sangztah]

What is the context for this AMAZINg footage 4:58?? Some kind of renaissance reenactment? I need to know!!

[@adamdrew3101]

looks like a 30 years war reenactment, so after the renaissance. potentially at grolle

[@notsm]

They may not have called it that, but what happened in the early stages of WW1 was basically highland charges against entrenched positions and MG nests.

[@_--Reaper--_]

no.

[@rosifervincent9481]

On the first day of the Somme, the British were ordered not to run, but walk in formation to the German lines. So….more of a Highland saunter.

[@John14-6...]

How did they incorporate troops using firearms with those performing the Highland charge using broad swords and axes? Was it a split in troops, or did they shoot their muskets and then charge with the melee weapons?

[@loyalpiper]

Majority of jacobites had muskets after 1700, they would often close to 30 yards, fire a single volley, throw the muskets down then charge them down.

[@debbiegilmour6171]

They all carried a musket and a melee weapon which they'd draw after advancing close enough to the enemy.

[@knoll9812]

Second

[@TheVideoNorm]

Excellent. Thanks for putting this together.

[@olivierpuyou3621]

These extremely courageous charges and practically without clothing other than a shirt, remind me of the Celtic warriors who fought naked. So it could only be a coincidence or a convergence after 2000 years? Or not.

[@AIIen.alledgedly2]

Sword fight my guy ?

[@chubbyninja89]

I actually think it's just a hilarious irony if nothing else. I mean, the Scots and Irish who were known to use the highland charge were very Catholic, and I just think it would've been hilarious to see how mortified they'd be if they made the connection between the highland charge and the mass charges the ancient Celts were known for. What would make it so funny is that Catholics, especially back then, tended to look down on other Christian groups, and even more so on non Christian peoples.

[@SeattlePioneer]

It occurs to me that the Japanese "Banzai" charge famously made on several occasions against American troops in the early years of WWII sounds a lot like a "Highland Charge." This amounted to a mass charge of Japanese troops against American infantry. It was repeatedly a failure, and was discarded as a tactic later in WWII. Rapid fire infantry weapons and artillery made this a losing tactic.

[@Vigilante-k4q]

No not really, the highland charge is silent until you happened upon the enemy

[@alexdodd5175]

Are the battle scenes here taken from some movie? Which movie is that? I'd love to watch the full version of it.

[@Edinsaonensis]

Search for Culloden Battle and Ambush from the TV serie Outlander

[@anthonybird546]

Gaelic warcries "YAH FOOKIN COONT!"

[@_--Reaper--_]

I would probably die laughing hysterically at that...

[@1simo93521]

"Fookin cop that ya great Jessie.,"

[@janezkrajnski]

Thank you for all your work. Don't worry. All things come to an end.

[@salonez91]

I dont understand why is this charge specific in any way and difers from any other charges in the history of warfare.

[@FranOfBattle]

those charges lacked the presence of the Highlanders

[@Jack-xg1kg]

It doesn't. It's a result of national myth making.

[@salonez91]

@@FranOfBattle hahaha good one

[@piggypoo]

"Just run forward" the technique

[@raphlvlogs271]

some cultures in the early modern period were still more melee oriented than others not all of them relied on firearms to the same degree despite of having access to it.

[@deaddocreallydeaddoc5244]

There is a book on an aspect of the U.S. Civil War titled, "Attack and Die," It is a cultural study of how the Highland Charge, (which is really the Celtic Charge as it dates back to the Roman era when the first examples of Celtic Charges were recorded) were how and why the Confederate Army succeeded in battles against the Union's cautious generals until the South basically bled themselves to death. The famous Southern "RebeL Yell" was also studied as similar to the old war cries of the Celts.

[@Sneed-mi3ov]

You're a complete imbecile Virtually ZERO celts settled in the southern united states The "scots irish" were not celtic. They did not speak gaelic. They were lowlanders and northern english protestants who despised the gaelic irish and the gaelic highlanders The highland charge is not some "ancient celtic battle tactic" it was invented in the 1600s, and the battle tactics of the confederates had nothing to do with the highland charge. The war cries the confederates used did not come from highlanders but from border reivers, who were not celtic in any way.

[@huntermckay572]

@@Sneed-mi3ov as a McKay whos a descendant of the highlanders, my ancestors spoke gaelic.

[@brucecollins641]

@@huntermckay572 aye, there was scots on both sides o the confederate war. highlanders and lowlanders.

[@fotppd1475]

Terror tactics are always good tactics. You can't just say to a soldier "do not feel fear", and even if you train him for it, you cannot change his instincts or the fact any simulation you provide him cannot imitate the real thing. (Especially when the real thing are Gaelic/Celtic soldiers charging at you.)

[@brittakriep2938]

As far as i know, in former days calthrops ( in german Krähenfüße) had been produced in sheer numbers, and stored in boxes to throw them arround a camp or to lightly fortyfy a an unprotected , easy to pass piece of land. I think such calthrops would have been a way to slow down a Highland Charge .

[@torg2126]

So in short, the Highland Charge inly works in circumstances favorable to it. Weird

[@meltdown4126]

Running at the enemy gunline while shouting angrily being a mid tactic at best is truly a shocker

[@luringfanatic5670]

shock something only works when it is going to work? wtf are u typing

[@themanformerlyknownascomme777]

The vast majority of tactics throughout history rely on favorable circumstances for an optimal outcome. This is not a new or shocking thing whatsoever.

[@cccspwn]

Suddenly it became clear why they made Scotsman Samurai Jacks best friend 😅

[@Jack-xg1kg]

The highland charge was a legacy 'tactic' from an outdated and unsophisticated military model that just happened to find a brief window where it was effective again. Pitch the highland charge against most late medieval armies and they'd have been absolutely creamed; and in fact were, which explains why the highland clans weren't a dominant military power and instead perched on some of the least productive land in British isles.

[@jfmaccoll]

one of many Countries the English Vasselised at that time with their flags and guns.

[@thorfinnravenfeeder]

Pish! Late Medieval armies were repeatedly defeated by Scottish armies which themselves, used similar equipment and tactics. In those cases, Highland troops tended to be limited to nobles and their retainers, usually immediate kin, or used as shock troops for a specific purpose, due to their limitations. Like the Norman's, such nobles trained for combat regularly and could form disciplined formations if needed. Most Scottish armies of the late Medieval period were filled by Lowland nobles and their retainers. At Bannockburn, limited numbers of Highland nobles took part in the main battle, with most held back until, the crucial moment when, the English were wavering, then unleashed in their typical reckless charge into the English flanks to break their army. The tactic worked spectacularly, but later Lowland writers played down the fact Highlanders turned the battle, by reducing them to "sma folk", supposedly charging to loot, - Lowland Norman racism and propaganda at work. Scottish/Irish mercenaries, known as Galloglaich, were highly sought after all over Europe, right up until, the early Middle Ages and the appearance of Renaissance armies and tactics. This, was due to their fighting prowess, much used by Irish lords against the English, who themselves, ended up employing Galloglaich to counter them. Records of such battles invariably recorded that, after the others had fled, the Galloglaich slogged it out toe-to-toe until, one side was all dead. naturally, their numbers at any given time were relatively low, due to this habit. They worked as far afield, as Byzantium and Egypt, so prized were they as bodyguards. They tended to use what is termed a "Lochaber Axe", with a very long handle and broad blade, which could bring down an armoured horse and knight. The Highland Charge could not, have been used in the late Medieval period, as there were no muskets then. It consisted of a mass charge which, stopped approx. 25 yards from the enemy, firing a mass volley then, dropping muskets, drawing swords, and charging immediately into melee.

[@Sneed-mi3ov]

@@thorfinnravenfeeder Cope Lowlanders were ALWAYS better fighters than the highlanders

[@thorfinnravenfeeder]

@@Sneed-mi3ov Where, do you get that ridiculous shite from? Your own arse? Lowlanders rarely, fared well against Highland troops, even when, they had the numerical advantage. Clearly, your version of history came from the back of a cereal packet. By all means, list the long string of Lowland victories your farcical claim would require as proof. I will not, be holding my breath!

[@thorfinnravenfeeder]

@@Sneed-mi3ov Harlaw and Dunkeld, - in all of Scottish history. Pathetic!

[@Number26ami]

There are important historical differences between the peoples and cultures (nations) occupying the British Archipelago, which are often confused as in this piece.

[@StaalBurgher0]

🤦‍♂️

[@jackjones7062]

What makes a highland charge different to a charge?

[@helygg8892]

It's in the Highlands duhhh

[@jackjones7062]

@@helygg8892 and it's highlanders doing it I suppose Actually I read up on it and the use of a musket volley before the charge to create a smoke screen was apparently quite unique, that's the innovation that seemed to make it different

[@SandRhomanHistory]

using short weapons in combination with targes to overpower bayonets, musket volley at 50m both to create an additional smoke as cover and open gaps in the enemy line, laying down to avoid the enemy volley, using psychology above everything else to improve the chances of success.

[@lolasdm6959]

@@SandRhomanHistoryLaying down to avoid the enemy volley is pretty common thou.

[@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311]

The weapons and tactics used - the Highlanders would jog up to pistol range, discharge a volley, drop their pistols and then charge forward with claymore and targes.

[@pepperspray7386]

i imagine it took days to come up with such a strategy and after hours of drinking and arguing in the war counsel "hell with it, just send em all in!"

[@lucaswallace7476]

There is a very fine line between bravery and stupidity. And that line is called "The flintlock musket."

[@toddpick8007]

disagree human waves worked in WW1 with much newer weapons. flintlock fire time is low makes them susceptible to this.

[@nickm1242]

Human waves "worked" in WWI because most of the time those commanders had the mindset of Zap Brannagan to send wave after wave after wave of men at fortified and entrenched positions that had heavy weapons like emplaced machine guns. They also had a tactic called the creeping barrage where artillery would shell the area in front of the advancing attackers and the smoke and explosions would provide "cover" for the attacking men until they advanced far enough to charge at the enemy but this had to be planned out well and it wasn't uncommon for the artillery to fire too far ahead which would provide much less cover or to even not fire far enough in which case the attacking soldiers would get hit by friendly fire. As for flintlocks, they had limited range and rate of fire true but some armies like the British armies also developed tactics to make up for this by having things like volley fire where only some ranks would fire, then reload while other ranks would then fire and so forth. This would also make it much tougher for an enemy to Leroy Jenkins charge them. As for Culloden, I've actually been to the battlesite when I visited Scotland and the Scots had a lot going against them. They were basically outnumbered melee fighters charging head against an entrenched British army that also had artillery. It was one of the more one sided battles in history. I@@toddpick8007

[@toddpick8007]

@@nickm1242 tech outpaced tactics human waves worked to beat modern arty and heavy weapons. creeping barrage wasnt implemented until 1917 because communications were garbage early war.

[@paulkirk7120]

​@@nickm1242I don't know which Culloden battlefield you visited but the British Hanoverians were definitely not dug in. They were arrayed in two lines of battle and the ground, unlike in earlier battles, suited them rather than the Jacobites. Bloody silly to attempt a charge across a bog into regular soldiers who were Veterans of the European wars.

[@odrum]

Dirk was also a formidable weapon in hand to hand combat

[@MrWiLDAPEMAN]

3:50 pre bayonet the highlanders would of had a huge advantage in melee with their Targes, broadsword and dirks.

[@ardshielcomplex8917]

They still had the advantage even as late as 1745, but it relied on the element of surprise, witness the battle of Preston Pans.

[@Lord.Kiltridge]

In 1707 the Acts of Union united the Scottish and English Kingdoms. While Scotland and England continue to exist, their respective Kingdoms did not. To this point Let me highlight an error from one of the last sentences in this video regarding the Battle of Moore's Creek Bridge 1776: "...about 1000 highlanders in the service of the English crown..." Since the English Monarchy ceased to exist 69 years prior, this statement is false. Those Highlanders served the British crown. This extends to the Monarchs themselves. As there has been no Kingdom of England since 1707, there also has been no King or Queen *of* England since than as well.

[@DeepCFisher]

This is the most pedantic thing I've read today

[@Lord.Kiltridge]

@@DeepCFisher You point at me and describe yourself. How Republican of you.

[@cicak2404]

There is no easter bunny, there is no tooth fairy, and there is no Queen of England

[@DeepCFisher]

@@Lord.Kiltridge well i guess since you said it, it must be true huh

[@Lord.Kiltridge]

@@cicak2404 Mega-right.

[@nowthenzen]

The thick, metal reinforced Targe was bullet resistant. There are several practical archeological vids on KZbin demonstrating this.

[@tenbear5]

Gosh, that’s exactly what happened to me. Fortunately i was just 5 minutes from a major A&E. The stent saved my life. (60 in January)

[@Slicedice1122]

5:28 Connor mcgregor on the right 😂

[@InfamousMax]

What a fine name for a fella in charge of the counter attack 1:42 :D

[@Twirlyhead]

At 11:09 the technique of each soldier in the line bayoneting at the assailant to his front right took great training and discipline in the face of a charge. I believe that the ancient Greek hoplites used much the same tactic; whether this was a direct influence on the British tactic I do not know.

[@ianmacewan9416]

Sorry' there is no documentary evidence of that. And the only place that the highlanders got through at Culloden they went right through the first two English lines. So whatever their bayonet practice was. It did not work.

[@ianmacewan9416]

An urban myth. Much the same as the one about an Englishman inventing the modern kilt.

[@Twirlyhead]

@@ianmacewan9416 I would be interested in your trusted source for that first point.

[@ianmacewan9416]

@@Twirlyhead There are NO trusted sources. simply because there are utterly NO documentary evidence to suport the theory. In fact all the evidence re the butcher is that he was a traditionalist and insisted that troops kept the old overhand bayonet method. Which in fact is displayed on every painting of the battle. And the fact that the Macdougals I think they were. Waltzed through two lines of redcoats and were only stopped by three lines of reserves. That is a fact mentioned in every book on the subject. So pure logic and common sense tells you it is an urban myth and that is what it is. Who in their right mind would ignore a highlander with a sword thinking that the guy on your left is going to save you?

[@Twirlyhead]

@@ianmacewan9416 Someone who was well trained to do it and knew it was his/their best chance of survival/winning just like the ancient Greeks did. _Who would use a great battle tactic ?_ Indeed. It seems what evidence there is only counts if it backs your beliefs.

[@alexandersmall7380]

Are you also going to cover the Banzai charge?

[@SirNarax]

Would be more or less just a topic about Bushido because a Banzi Charge wasn't a tactic but a response to losing. Instead of surrendering imperial Japanese soldiers ran into the enemy. Surrender was viewed as shameful by dying bravely even if it was futile or 'stupid' was accepted to be the right choice.

[@blakebailey22]

I wonder how much more effective a unit of shielded swordsmen could have been had they been used as a specialty unit in an army of predominantly line infantry, instead of having the whole army participating in the highland charge. For example, while the line infantry engage with enemy line infantry, you have maybe one or two highland chargers that weave through the battlefield. Maybe a unit or two of pikemen as well. I reckon something like that could have even been useful in the Napoleonic wars.

[@ComCommie]

Probably too specialised to use effectively in campaign

[@The_Christian_Cavalier]

Probably would work well if they could also fight with firearms when necessary

[@The_Christian_Cavalier]

​@@ComCommieoh bother 🙄

[@HrHaakon]

that sounds similar to the early tercio, where one third of the forces (I wonder if the name refers to the three unit types?) were sword-and-buckler men, also known as coseletes. No relation to Cosette from Les Miserables. They stopped using them because they died so much.

[@ingold1470]

This is what cavalry was for

[@ReviveHF]

So what's the difference between the Chinese 17th century Shielded Infantry tactics, Scottish shock tactics and the Swedish Carolean tactics?

[@Leaffordes]

To my understanding from watching this video, the highlanders fired once (I suppose the distance varied widely?) and then melee charged with war cries, often carrying broadswords and targes. The Swedes, however, stopped to fire twice, with the two rear ranks firing at approximately 50 meters and the two front ranks at 20-the range was slightly modified during the course of the war. Between the two volleys, the Swedes jogged, followed by a charge only after the final volley; it's possible that the charge was done in a slower pace compared to the highlanders, seeing as the Swedes put a lot of emphasis on cohesion and order. Furthermore, about a third of the Swedes carried pikes, either standing in the center of the formation or spread out along the whole line, while the rest had muskets (often with bayonet). Every soldier also carried a rapier, which was preferred over the bayonet-equipped musket in melee combat. However, the soldier would probably carry both weapons in his hands when charging. Unlike the highlanders, the Swedes would be mostly silent during the attack so that the commands conveyed by the drummers could be heard. TL;DR 1. The highlanders fired once-the Swedes fired twice. 2. The highlanders had broadswords and targes-the Swedes had pikes, muskets and rapiers/short swords. 3. The highlanders charged over a great distance-the Swedes charged at a distance of only 20 meters. 4. The highlanders prioritized speed-the Swedes prioritized cohesion. 5. The highlanders made war cries-the Swedes were silent.

[@Leaffordes]

@@DillsyYourDaddy67 Thanks! If you know at what range the highlanders typically unleashed their volley, please let me know.

[@arizonabusinessleague918]

I don't (loke other commenters) understand what's being discussed here. Charging was still a viable tactic even until the American Civil War, when firearms and artillery were even more dangerous!

[@thorfinnravenfeeder]

It was a particular tactic employed by the Scots in the 17th and 18th centuries. It was first used by Alasdir McColla, in Ireland, at a time when, they fired in ranks until, one side broke and ran. The trick was, to charge en masse, then all stop suddenly at approx. 25 yards, firing a single mass volley then, dropping muskets, drawing swords, and charging recklessly into the enemy. The only trouble with this tactic was, if it failed to break the enemy, it became a desperate melee, and being lightly armoured, (hence, fast-moving), Scots fared badly in prolonged combat against better equipped and/or trained opponents. Just, getting such tribal warriors to perform a single, well-organised manoeuvre was an act of genius by McColla, as such troops were notoriously fickle and individualistic, not to mention, highly fractious and stubborn. They traditionally, fought one-to-one, or in immediate kin groups, not in any kind of organised formation. Unbeknownst to the modern world, the mass charges you refer to in other wars like, the US Civil War, had their origins in precisely this tactic, created by McColla, but misunderstood and misused ever after. It was the combined shock of the mass volley followed immediately, by the unexpected reckless charge, which made it effective.

[@WhenDoesTheVideoActuallyStart]

​@@thorfinnravenfeeder That just sounds like a variation on the Carolean charge. Except the Caroleans traded firepower for eldritchness, since those fanatics calmly marched into range for the last shot before the charge.

[@Sneed-mi3ov]

@@thorfinnravenfeeder The "scots irish" of the american south were not descended from scottish highlanders. They descended from lowland scots/northern english protestant, english speaking settlers in northern ireland who later went to the americas They were not highlanders. They were not jacobites. They supported the duke of cumberland. Nothing about the tactics of the confederate states of america have anything to do with the jacobites

[@lukalovric2463]

Its not a Sunday if Sandrhoman dosen't upload

[@shinjiikari1021]

What would happen if you have banzai charge against the highland charge? Both with same era technology

[@nawm8]

What? The main difference between the two IS their equipment and the technological context. At its heart, both are aggressive charges in a context where ranged combat is expected.