This is NOT How you Fire in Three Ranks! - The Accuracy of "Revolution" (1985) Part III

Well, it has been some time, hasn't it? But all the same, the journey must go on, and so we pick up right where we left off with the British regulars' assault on rebel lines! They attempt to push the Doodles back with three crisp volleys and a zealous bayonet charge- but only accomplish such by completely disregarding the commands of their Sergeant Major and through what appears to be divine intervention preventing friendly fire killing off their entire force. Indeed, in this our final video of pedantic complaining on this battle scene, we seem some of the absolute worst offenses to historical accuracy I have ever had the displeasure of witnessing. And yet, there are also a great deal many scenes that I greatly enjoy...oh well, yet another video I suppose!
My artillery video I reference in this video: • How to Load and Fire a...
The video in the upper-right corner (see first comment for explanation) • Old Sturbridge Village...
If you would like to support the Channel on Patreon:
/ brandonf -
-
- -
- -
This video was made in support of The Native Oak. Learn more about our educational mission here:
www.nativeoak.org/
If you'd like to support the channel, please consider giving on Patreon,
/ brandonf
You can follow me on social media too!
/ thenativeoak
/ brandonfisichella

[@BrandonF]

I have to apologize for the strange formatting of this one. I tried every which way to make this video not get immediately picked up by the automated copyright systems, which- despite my narrating over the entire video, and so not actually being in any violation of copyright law, at least to my knowledge of how Fair Use works- continually flagged the video and outright banned it from showing worldwide. Other than going back through and editing the entire video to not have any actual video, which would clearly reduce the quality and weaken the points I am trying to make, or uploading it to a different website, this was the only way I found to make it work. As such the first-person footage in the corner is not relevant to this video, but I thought it was at least thematically appropriate. It is the footage I took from Old Sturbridge Village this year. Link in the video description. I will try to design the next video on this film to be less reliant on direct footage, so we can avoid this problem again.

[@gaslightstudiosrebooted3432]

Brandon F. Great job regardless!

[@BrandonF]

Thank you!

[@gaslightstudiosrebooted3432]

Brandon F. Question: did British troops fight in open order? I read something along those lines in a blog, Kabinetteskrieg.

[@BrandonF]

Yes, quite often. Kabinettskrieg is an incredible resource.

[@DenysDuk]

Great video, as always, Brandon! I was wondering if you ever plan on making a video about recovering the wounded and burying the dead (both own and the enemy). It seems like much of the focus in the media portrayals is dedicated to the action scenes or, in some instances, the preparation for the battle, yet little is discussed about what usually happened after. In any event, your efforts to rectify the popular portrayals of history are much appreciated!

[@NUSensei]

All three ranks charging bayonets? I'm sure the first rank will get the point.

[@BrandonF]

Shame on you for that.

[@muizzmustafa4438]

Ahhhhh.A man of culture I see. ;)

[@josephpeck8723]

@@BrandonF Aww, you missed a perfect chance to say "*Stabbed* in the back." Now that would have been a clever pun.

[@lillianaavaritia9717]

Oh my gosh you little... I can't stop laughing

[@Rubicon2305]

I saw what you did there... he he he, buwahahaha!

[@ErichZornerzfun]

"Fire!" *first rank cups ears and tries to dowse their burning hats* "Fire!" *entire second rank falls over dead* "Oh yeah kneel and reload" I would laugh but I have managed to do that in Total War so...

[@HaloFTW55]

Doesn’t matter when you play as the Russians. Just conscript more Peasants (they were literally peasants).

[@charlesgrimmer6486]

Multiple units one shooting the other?

[@pretzelbomb6105]

“Your training starts now. We have placed a loaf of bread in the center of this field. This is all the food we have for all one hundred of you for the week. I’d love to make sure you don’t kill each other but I have to leave. Happy Hunting!”

[@ErichZornerzfun]

@@charlesgrimmer6486 I was following an online guide that recommended putting ranged cavalry behind the line infantry to provide support fire...which I guess means to shoot the line infantry in the back :P I am sure someone was court-martialed for that one.

[@Zerpderp0]

It took me 5 battles with over a 1000 casualties each before I realized not to tell my men in the back to fire at will.

[@renardgrise]

At least "The Patriot" got line spacing correct ;-)

[@Winaska]

Zack Tyler you’re not wrong. And the commands for firing were accurate too. Actually there is A LOT in the Patriot that is accurate. The problem with the Patriot isn’t in the details, it’s in the storyline and character portrayals, and in some details of military history that are MISSING as opposed to INNACURATE

[@honisoitquimalypense1316]

The patriot as a film is a load of shit, its actually embarrassing how historically inaccurate it is.

[@cognitivebehaviouraltherap1255]

@@honisoitquimalypense1316 The patriot is around as accurate as braveheart

[@thomastucker6073]

@@cognitivebehaviouraltherap1255 We called the church while building it [in the village] St Braveheart's Cathedral! The film was a historical joke, I left part way through to go work on a documentary.

[@tic-tac9323]

the only reason why I even barely tolerate the existence of the Patriot is because of the battle scenes are pretty cool

[@ChristheRedcoat]

12:52 "Sgt. Major, what are you doing? Sgt. Major, stahp!"

[@BrandonF]

The mad lad went and did it.

[@Dragonblaster1]

"Sarn't-Major Smith!" "Yes, SAH!" "Back to combat training for you, _Private_ Smith!"

[@TheLesserWeevil]

Something that has always stood out for me in battle scenes in many movies is the, perhaps unintentional, censored version of what happens when a man is struck by a musket ball or bullet. In most movies, being hit by a musket and/or any firearm means going from fully upright to on the ground, still, silent and dead in about a second. In reality, the battlefield would be filled with the screams of the wounded, the dying, the writhing and the men trying to stagger/crawl back to their camp. Unless you are (un)fortunate enough to be struck directly in the heart or brain, you will be alive for quite some time after being hit. I've always felt that portraying this side of war would do a lot to show just how violent and merciless battle can be.

[@chrismath149]

I remember when Call of Duty World at War came out. Some people in my country, Austria, as well as in Germany (the same advocating censorship in computer games) were outraged how the aforementioned and similar games don't show the brutal reality of war. So, basically after several scenes depicting horrible events (wounded Germans being shot dead by russians as well as russians shooting german prisoners of war) were taken out they still complained that it was not horrible enough. These people are either hypocrites or idiots. Maybe even both.

[@erikseavey9445]

That bayonet to the gut. Yeah it would be something.

[@scottleft3672]

You often don't realize at first if it goes through non bone....and shock will stun you into disorientation...people tend to stand still and stare at their wound/s...then feint.

[@Soulessdeeds]

I have seen a man with multiple AK47 bullet wounds in his chest. His shirt was removed. His chest was clear of blood. However the bed of the truck that he was being transported to the aid station in was covered in blood. The man was still alive as to my astonishment he moved his head and looked directly at me as the truck he was in drove past me and my fellow soldier. Now I was stopped in my M88a1 and I had heard the sirens coming our way. After the Iraq police trucks drove past to get him to the aid station. I just looked over to my fellow soldier and said: Did you see that mother fucker?? He was still alive!! I was amazed as while this wasn't my first time seeing the results of combat as I had seen wounded and deceased soldiers before. I saw a 1SGT who I had at one time served under, receive wounds from a RPG hit. His head and leg had taken shrapnel damage. I didn't even know his head had the wound because it had been cauterized and his legs only indication was that the bone and shin were severed. The calf muscle was the only thing holding his foot up. Again no blood there due to cauterizing. The battlefield today is nothing compared to back during muskets and ball fighting. But the human body hasn't changed. I am definitely sure people screamed and hollered during combat back in the old days. Its only natural when you are in that incredible amount of pain. But the kinds of wounds you receive do dictate your bodies response.

[@theldraspneumonoultramicro405]

a movie with accuracy to that extent would seriously traumatize a lot of movie goers, the snowflakes would take to the internet and cry about how the movie gave them PTSD.

[@youngbyun3198]

A disfigured and burned grenadier charging with his bearskin cap on fire would make any man run. Clearly the Sgt. Maj knows more about battle XD

[@HaloFTW55]

They’ll be like the devils to the Yankees and strike the fear of God into them, good show!

[@youngbyun3198]

@@HaloFTW55 Not too dissimilar to the Iron Maiden's The Trooper album cover!

[@Thraven7]

What an image, right after enjoying Brandon's graphic descriptions of the results!

[@iskandartaib]

I wonder how flammable bearskin caps were...

[@Zamolxes77]

Yeah, and 2 bayonets sticking out of his chest !!

[@grahamcampbell8297]

British Infantry did not fire as a battalion in a single volley! They fired by “Platoon fire.” This was a complex fire system which gave the battalion the appearance of a continuous fire. Brandon’s quite right the battalion would have closed up and “locked” before firing. The ranks wouldn’t kneel, two ranks fired. The third rank was a reserve. These tactics and discussion of their effectiveness are set out by writers like Brent Nosworthy in his exhaustive and well researched books on 18th century, and Napoleonic, warfare.

[@kkarx]

I wonder if it was not better if the first line just laid down (the first line would be better protected on the ground would they not?), the second line kneeled and the third stood in the case they were to shoot in three lines.

[@grahamcampbell8297]

kkarx The French used a method similar to this in the early 18th century, before returning to mass battalion fire like the Austrians and Russians.

[@jchrist5410]

@@grahamcampbell8297 Thank you for highlighting Nosworthy. I see he did a few American Civil War books as well which is fantastic for my military history masters degree. Thank you, Graham!

[@grahamcampbell8297]

J Christ I recommend all of his books. They are dense, heavy going, but well researched. Look at his sources at the end. He spent years researching his books and the thing that shocks the most is he states he edited the material down considerably to about a third of all the material he accumulated. When you read his books you will ponder just how much research he did. Given the subject matter I think he must be a little obsessed, but thank God for that. I have never read any other books on the subject with such attention to detail, or such obvious care in researching the primary source material. If any of this helps with your masters I am glad to have been of some small service. Read all of his books, he is worth the effort.

[@Winaska]

Battalion sized volleys were used by British forces in some circumstances, primarily, interestingly enough, in combat in North America. Also, in practice, platoon fire often broke down after the first few volleys, and most battles, especially larger ones, continued on with “fire at will.” But I’m North America, battles were smaller and thus commands more easily given quickly and accurately, allowing for better discipline (when needed) and often a battalion sized volley followed by a bayonet charge was deemed enough to run off troublesome Indians and rebels.

[@vinyl2627]

Your point about the command, 'regiment halt'. The british army would not have used a preparatory command between the first address and the final command. They would not have then, and they do not now as it remains the same drill. Every man in the column would be anticipating and ready for any command the sergeant major could give due to there extensive training and discipline. The biggest problem with this scene where the command is concerned is that it wasn't repeated down the line by the NCO's. In a loud battlefield like that, the sergeant major's command would easily be drowned out by musket and cannon fire, necessitating the need for drums and bugles and for commands to be relayed.

[@steelwarrior105]

US is the same, "unit" is the preperatory command

[@chiefkalif9675]

@@steelwarrior105 Indeed, and the preparatory command would be given on a left foot, the command would be given on the next left foot, and the unit would take a step with their right foot and a half step with their left foot to come to a halt at attention. The additional step is part of the command, and the person leading the formation will have to anticipate the formation taking another right foot step before actually stopping. On top of that, the half step itself would allow soldiers to dress the line themselves before actually halting. If I were given a halt command and I saw I was going to be ahead of the person to the right of me, I would make sure the right root stops in line with them and the half step would be shorter to make myself dressed without having to shuffle myself into position after having been halted. And as Vinyl was saying, a well drilled soldier would be able to anticipate what comes after the preparatory command because if you're marching and you hear "Company!" then you know the command is going to be "Halt!" because any other marching command starts with a direction or the name of the maneuver. All commands are similar in this way. If you're at-ease and someone says "Company!" you will automatically go to parade rest because you know the next order is going to have to be either "parade rest", "attention", or "rest". "Port" is always followed by "arms", "Half-right" is always followed by "face", etc.

[@kaspernyberg]

This ain't a line regiment. It's a firing squad!

[@TheRomanRuler]

Yeah firing squad their own men.

[@historyarmyproductions]

It Tis'!

[@Zamolxes77]

A suicide squad !

[@benjamingrist6539]

While you were scrolling through the list of your videos, I noticed that all your POV reenactment videos have been demonetized. I could (kinda) understand if the videos had blood and gore in them, but just a bunch of guys dressed in rev war kit *pretending* to shoot each other? Something seems a little off here.

[@bskorupk]

What's even weirder is what else on KZbin isn't banned/demonetized, such as archive WW1 footage of French Infantry attacking a (massively outnumbered) German skirmish line on a hill in winter, first from columns, then quickly into lines, then open order, advancing quickly, but with disproportionate casualties. However wretchedly blunt about using such methods against repeating rifles, it does show the positive effect of proper spacing, command, weapons handling, and musician/standard placement, as well as appropriate methods, specifically changing formations for the situation, and not stopping/stalling to fire when closing with the steel. Stranger still, for some reason the 2003 documentary "World War One in Colour" after colorizing it, used it repeatedly for discussions of the Eastern and Carpathian fronts, despite the Kepis, Gaiters, Lebels, and the archival black and white version's description cards stating it's origins otherwise.

[@charlesdewitt8087]

@@bskorupk Do you have a link to that video by chance?

[@bskorupk]

@@charlesdewitt8087 Yes. The restored/colour one (although it's got the overwrought British documentary feel to it) is far more intelligible than the archived one, mostly due to the archive version showing not enough of the screen and showing too many watermarks, but is important due to the written cards, including the one with "The black dots near the top of the hill are the Germans" making the Color one more complete and intriguing. On the Colour version it's from 12:04 - 12:53 kzbin.info/www/bejne/iKamdZl3pdald8k The Black and White version, it's from 3:20 - 4:13 kzbin.info/www/bejne/eX-4iXqQn5qDj80

[@charlesdewitt8087]

@@bskorupk Thank you

[@bskorupk]

@@charlesdewitt8087 Sure thing! :)

[@99IronDuke]

The Regiment was not, and is not, a fighting formation in the British infantry, the battalion is.

[@BrandonF]

Precisely.

[@dgharisable]

@@BrandonF To expand a bit, the regiment is the parent unit and is concerned with administration. A regiment is composed of a small regimental staff and one or more battalions of ten companies each. In the ARW period a regiment is normally two battalions, each of ten companies of eighty men each at full establishment. Normally one battalion was kept at home and and carried out recruitment, training, and equipping, as well as serving as part of the army's reserve force; the other battalion was available for service wherever it might be needed. In the beginning of the conflict battalions were generally kept together and employed as a single unit, but in the course of operations companies were often detached and the battalion might operate with only two or three of its own companies and would be filled out with companies detached from other battalions in the event of battle. The strength of those companies would also decline as disease and wounds depleted their numbers; by the end of the war the average company strength was between forty and fifty men, with battalions averaging four hundred men each.

[@xxxphilippxxx]

in every 18th century army

[@anthonybrownhovelt]

@@dgharisable Orders tended to be relayed from Battalion to Companies. After an initial Battalion Volley, it was common for Companies to volley on their own. The Officers gave the orders, the SNCOs where there to order the ranks, ensure people didn't leave the ranks, had ammo and all the other things to be done!!!! Carried out their drills correctly etc... Interestingly the US Army has kept the tradition of repeating Battalion Commands at Company level when on parade. In that, I expect they are following a tradition the British army has lost! Although warning orders are still used on the parade ground. I was a Gunner and we were quite long-winded! E.G 32 Minden 1759 Light Airdefence Battery Royal Artillery, Battery 'Shun! The Battery will move to the right in threes, right turn! Etc... so the premises that you gave a warning order is correct. Also, you added in Retire to the ...or Advance to the ...and then the left or right turn and who you then took your dressing from. Centre, left or right. So " By the right"...When doing gun drill things were very much more to the point. Take post, Detachments rear or front! A bit like the Light Infantry certain orders gave a whole series of events to be done such as ceasefiring; which meant you started a whole series of events to pack up and get ready to move!

[@lewisharrison7111]

Ah my twin

[@Apollo890]

I'm surprised you did not mention the amount of colours (flags) the battalion seemed to have, I counted five bit I always understood that a battalion should have just two the Kings colour and the regimental colour. But credit where credit is due this is the first revolutionary war film where I have seen the Americans with the Grand Union Flag the rest just go straight for the Stars and Stripes.

[@superimposedtab]

Nerding out while doing a technical breakdown of a movie ..... "Now that's soldiering"!

[@pnwfarmdog4090]

Sharpe!

[@Oversamma]

I reminded you like 2 months ago! :D Glad you finally had the time to do it, I was desperately yearning for this.

[@williamcook4259]

Oversama )

[@maxbodymass]

I remember being in this film I was a revolting mob. If remember there was a lot of health and safety bollocks and a lot of people did not turn up for other days shooting

[@gabemando7823]

Notice how everyone is taking cover except for the drummer boy lol

[@Michael-Archonaeus]

Easy win. Just take out the drummer boy, and now the soldiers can't hear the commands, because they aren't being repeated by anyone lol

[@Chironex_Fleckeri]

He's so focused on remembering what he's supposed to be doing

[@bjornjohansson8783]

I really love these old historical war movies. To their defense back in the 80th and before, accurate information about how battles was fought was probably debated by historians in the universities and not so much in the service of filmmakers. And the ordinance of 1985 was probably not so picky about the historical authenticity as we are today. Your comments on the faults and errors are still enjoyable and educational.

[@Oversamma]

Certainly worth the wait; excellent work as always, good sir.

[@MrSraki]

Perfect presentation! The points to be discussed were presented clearly with sound logical arguments and the supporting images and video were on point. Well done and thank you!

[@colinm8200]

Im a Civil War reenactor and i agree about the fog. Black powder really does linger in the air, even choking you up sometimes. The strong smell of sulfur is killer.

[@steffenrosmus1864]

First row : standing, second row : kneeing, third row : lying And then FIRE. Save the enemy's work

[@SethimusMaximus]

You're...the Bernadette Banner of battle scenes!

[@u_sjames7635]

Best revolution battle scene analysis right here. +1 like. There are some commands, specifically in dept that makes it seem so innacurate that I've never seen when I've watched it myself. I've learned a lot by watching this. Thanks, great vid.

[@GeneralJackRipper]

I think the reason this scene irks me so much is because it wouldn't have cost the production team any extra time or money to get it right.

[@DaRealPrinceofPinoys]

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA Thats funny, you clearly have no idea the amount of time and money it takes to shoot a scene

[@skinflutey]

PrinceofPinoys I don’t think he means that they should have reshot the scene

[@GeneralJackRipper]

You clearly missed the point, which is obvious, given your own lack of the same. The production team could have simply taken a few days to do some proper research before shooting the scene. It's that easy. Dumbass. @@DaRealPrinceofPinoys

[@GeneralJackRipper]

There's no need for a re-shoot if you film it correctly the first time. @@skinflutey

[@skinflutey]

General Jack Ripper yea I know

[@tdrk6114]

Rewatching in 2020. I can’t help but think “chill Brandon they are just social distancing.”

[@thomastucker6073]

In N. America the three rank formation in line of battle was not used, impractical, but do not take my word for this look it up. On the Continent, early on multiple ranks were tried out and turned out not to be very workable or controllable. The result was by the mid century the three rank became the norm. In Europe, with very large numbers of troops involved three ranks worked fine. As for Donald's [I've worked with him before,] scene, its what we called in the Corps a cluster f__k and totally out of touch with reality, so no comments, but you got it right Brandon, good analysis.

[@brianfuller5868]

Thanks for actually doing this video. So much here!

[@ethanhatcher5533]

Brandon F for Sergeant Major 1778

[@SvensHistoryLab]

The packs are obviously a early Napoleonic war pattern. Recognizable by the color and regimental badge, which doesn't even look like the one that was on the colors

[@kingwolf9447]

Quite informative,I'm going to use this to fact check and perfect the commands I using during video game line battles.

[@benw431]

Very interesting! The 10th actually practiced firing in 3 ranks at our last drill. Certainly different than what we’re used to, but still very cool!

[@M2M-matt]

These drills were practised time and time and time again. More so than any other drill in the British army at the time. It was drilled so often that it became second nature to soldiers. That with firing and reloading their muskets they became very disciplined and were able to keep their dressings (keeping in line) when the soldiers in front fell. In order that they new which space to fill, each solder was numbered and they also knew which number was immediately in front of them. So when their number in the rank in front fell they moved forward at, which they called quick step, to fall into the rank in front. Also quite often they took their dressing by the man on the left in each rank. This was all drilled and practised day and daily and many soldiers would have had to do these hundreds of times over months or even years before they saw any kind of battle. It was all second nature to them and they were, in those days, one of the best armies at the time in that kind of battle tactics. However, saying all that it was barbaric and ridiculous to walk in front of people firing at you. Yet it took bravery of the highest order and British soldiers hardly every broke rank.

[@johnlemon3809]

We've been waiting a while...

[@BrandonF]

A little bit, yep...

[@johnlemon3809]

But thats ok, I found this entertaining and had a good chuckle at your jokes.

[@davidshepherd397]

Good point about the order arms, especially for those kneeling.

[@Boemel]

Found a new youtube rabbithole, damn this channel is interestig.

[@BrandonF]

Glad to have you with us!

[@GI.Jared1984]

could you do a video on the British orders of battle and unit organisation from the section all the way up to the Battalion and Regiment

[@ashyahardan]

I wholeheartedly agree, there aren't many good sources that explain the exact organisation of the 18th and 19th century armies in detail. Though I know quite a decent bit about it, there's the possibility that there's alot I don't seem to know simply due to the lack of information supplied on the topic.

[@dernwine]

That would probably be a stupidly long video. The British Army order of battle is very .... um... varied? The word Regiment as an example: take The Rifles, a regiment that consists of 7 Battalions, and compare with; the Queens Royal Hussars, a battalion sized Regiment with no Battalions; The Royal Artillery Regiment, which consists of.... a number of regiments; and the Honorable Artillery Company, which is a Battalion.... or maybe a Regiment. This is just a handful of examples from the 21st century (largely standardised ) British Army.

[@GI.Jared1984]

​@@dernwine I'm not really interested in the 21st century more the 17th and 18th when we had a real army Not just a Defence force

[@dernwine]

@@GI.Jared1984 you mean one of the few armies that can deploy globally in the 21st century? You mean the army that is larger or equal in size today than it was for most of the 17 and 1800s? As for why I picked the 21st century names they perfectly illustrate the issues with orbats in the British army, since they are more standardised today than they where in the 1800's.

[@VCYT]

@roger - that was less an army an more like an expedition force.

[@edocsil123]

the space between file partners is done so the group looks bigger and therefore better on screen

[@a-drewg1716]

it would also be easier and quicker to train the extras to hold such a formation as tight formations are harder to maintain and they do not have time to train just some extras enough to do so.

[@emmitstewart1921]

What appears in this film is that the director and producers had no idea of how an army moves and operates, nor of how it performs any maneuver. This scene shows how to perform an operation that a modern soldier would call a clusterf**k.

[@vorschlaghammer9888]

I must say I agree on most points except the one man manning the cannon. My cousin builds period correct cannons and taught me how to man a 12 pounder Napoleon gun alone, granted I took twice as long as a full crew but it is possible and during my time doing US Civil War re-enacting I have captured Yank artillery and manned it alone when the four men with me went down to Union rifle fire. I fired "Grape" at the Union rifle squad [ I say squad because only 5 men came to recapture the gun ] after firing I began manning it alone and was able to convince Union cav that continuing their assualt on our left flank was an unwanted plan and they pulled back.

[@OcarinaSapphr-]

I know it’s set much later than most of your stuff, but- if you’ve seen it... what did you think of the volley fire in ‘Zulu’? I loved & recommend HistoryBuffs’ review of it, & Waterloo.

[@fourminutemadness4454]

Then Sharpe came in and taught the rebels how to fire 4 rounds per minute.

[@Superiorform4]

Sharpe, the good and loyal British officer?

[@rebel55th]

"What's happened to the second rank, Sergeant-Major?" "Dead on the field, sir!"

[@annekedebruyn7797]

@Brandon F. I might have some insight info about the weak charges. I shot a project a few months ago for a documentary about the Dutch. There were a few reasons why black powder wasn't used. It was due to shot continuity. In tests the black powder stayed so long that cutting was hard in certain scenes. Tho what we have now is visual effects capability. We enhance the real smoke with fake pyro which means we get the full charge safe and realistic in every shot. That is a luxury these guys didn't have in the 80's. Also set safety is an issue on lower budget movies/documentaries. People rather go for passable for 90% of the audience than cutting something that might be worth having for the story. Thanks for the video!

[@thenoobinator3508]

Can you do Waterloo?

[@BrandonF]

Absolutely, the only question is "when"...

[@AudieHolland]

Funny thing about "Waterloo:" it explains why most people believe that officers and soldiers would fight in their dress (parade) uniforms during an actual battle. Because as I learned later, bearskin caps were usually protected by canvas covers during battle to prevent them from getting dirty. The thing with the Battle of Waterloo was, the alert that Napoleon was on the move came in just as Wellington and his officers were just attending a ball. They quickly rushed to the field without having time to change into battle dress so that is why we see them wearing their best uniforms in battle. Also, one of the generals isn't even wearing a uniform, instead he is wearing a gentlemen's frock coat, including top hat! I guess that general was on leave and also didn't have time to change into proper battle dress.

[@Schattengewaechs99]

„Give me night or give me Blucher.“

[@Thewoodyrg]

@@AudieHolland They were just wearing their normal uniforms? And the man not in his uniform was Sir Thomas Picton, only because his luggage containing his uniform hadn't arrived yet. Also British Grenadiers in the Napoleonic times didn't wear their bearskins on campaign, just the regular shakos of the time, whether they be stovepipe or belgic, with a white plume.

[@AudieHolland]

@@Thewoodyrg No, they went straight from the ball to the battlefield, no time to change. We may not notice it but I bet their battlefield uniforms weren't as pristine as their dress uniforms. During the American War for Independence, French troops that had marched with the Americans for quite some time through the countryside, were admired by the American people when they marched into town, especially remarking how very white their uniforms were. You don't keep your uniform white if you're using it marching days or weeks through bush and mud. The French simply changed into their dress uniforms before marching into town. But we never get to see that in the movies so we think they went into battle dressed like that. I bet the French battlefield uniforms were slightly less white and much less clean.

[@SMGJohn]

War and Peace Soviet film did it best, best war scene of the Napoleon campaign I ever seen.

[@keithjohnston4488]

excellent video, very informative. question: would they march into battle with bayonets fixed automatically or if not at what point would they fix them?

[@khamulshadow]

Thanks for posting this- it always bugs the hell out of me when I see historical films where the ranks are not closed up. I think it probably has to do with confusion between a force deployed in three ranks, and one deployed in three lines of companies or regiments formed behind each other for support.

[@Zarastro54]

I also hate the sound of the Sgt. Major's voice. It sounds like he's half gagged and speaking from the back of his throat or something, so the orders are hardly discernible.

[@republicempire446]

Hey, what’s your view on Total War: Empire and Total War: Napoleon? Especially the mod called Napoleon Total War 3 aka NTW3

[@BrandonF]

A lot of problems, as you'd imagine, but I have a shameful number of hours in them.

[@republicempire446]

Brandon F. What do you mean?

[@Zarastro54]

@@republicempire446 Well the vanilla uniforms in Empire are atrocious copy pasts of the same, generic, also a-historical uniform for starters.

[@republicempire446]

There’s got to be more than uniforms. I was referring to tactics, units, and formations used in the two games.

[@Felix18302]

ntw3 is strategy-wise actually pretty good

[@ianfrancis3605]

Love your work 🇬🇧

[@screamingcrane8187]

I may not be a subscriber but this was a very nice video and I`m glad that KZbin for once has managed to recommend good quality content without me fighting my way to it. Anyways good video very enjoyable.

[@alittlebitofhistory]

Yet more evidence on why you should never put Oddball in charge of anything.

[@obi-wankenobi1233]

Oddball, who do you mean? Wait, you mean Oddball from Kelly's Heroes, don't you?

[@EndingTimes0]

Historical accuracy gets overridden by people with their own ideas of what they want a scene to look like, historical accuracy be damned, all the time.

[@nickrhymeswith4302]

Movies will sell better if they don't follow real history, and instead make it look like what people THINK history looked like By the time videos complaining about historical accuracy are made, the company has already made quite a bit of money

[@a-drewg1716]

They are made to get the best scenes, action, and story. So generally battles are quicker then they would have been in real life. They are also in more spread out formations to make it look larger. Most of the time they only have a small amount of actually historical arms due to budget, and the same for the powder is not the actual pure black powder and even then is in smaller quantities due to budget reason. The extras who make up the soldiers aren't all given the same amount of time a historical soldier would have been given to train so they are never as disciplined in their movements, and numerous others thing which take time which studios never have, and money a studio may barely have and risking going over both can mean thousands of dollars more or being force to cut down entire scenes to try to make room.

[@shadowscall7758]

Not just historical accuracy, but modern accuracy in almost anything as well. I mean, the way that modern firearms work in movies has very little basis in reality and I really wish it would stop, since a lot of people get their firearm knowledge from movies, which obviously is horrible.

[@Simnic93]

I just found your channel recently and have been grinding my way through you videos. I really agree on the importance of historical authenticity and I have begun to wonder about the authenticity of one of my favorite series "Sharpe" or "Sharpes Rifles" which is about the Napoleonic wars. I can't really find any review of it and it would be great to see an in depth historical assesment of the show. Of course there are differences between the American Revolution and the Napoleonic wars but it would be great to see something done in your style.

[@model-man7802]

About 70 grains of triple F black powder gets a decent bang.90 grains gets a bigger bang and more noise but your spraying black powder out in front of you and waisting it.Depending on the event and how much shooting you will do it doesn't come cheap anymore,Especially if your the proud owner of several 12 pounders in a Civil War Battle.At Gettysburg in 1988 we noticed a curious rattling sound during brief lulls.It sounded just like sleet hitting the leaves just as a snowstorm begins.It was unspent black powder spraying all over us.We were closer than we were supposed to be though.

[@TheLoopyAlchemist]

Great video! Have you ever considered making a basic introduction to linear warfare tactics and commands (i.e. why standing in a strait line and firing in volleys makes sense given the capabilities of muskets and what a command like "Present" means etc.) in order help introduce more people to the time period and your channel?

[@grahamcampbell8297]

The casualties inflicted on the British line are way too heavy. Musketry with smooth bore flintlocks was only really effective at 100 yards or less. Many firefights were at 60-30 yards. Then the casualties could be very heavy. A very good account of volley fire is given by Captain Parker when describing an exchange of volleys between two Irish regiments at Malplaquet in 1709. One battalion was in British Service, the other battalion was a “Wild Geese” battalion in French pay. The two battalions opened fire at 100 yards with the British battalion advancing on the French battalion. Three volleys were exchanged and the French battalion lost the duel and retired. The British battalion in three volleys inflicted forty casualties on the French battalion using platoon fire, the French battalion using battalion volley inflicted four casualties!! That was the reality. If the French had stood then casualties could have been much higher as they exchanged volleys at 30-40 yards, but usually one side broke first. Bayonet charges during the 18th century were as rare as hens teeth, Battalions usually gave way under the weight of musket fire.

[@projectilequestion]

I don't think saying that bayonet charges were rare in the 18th century is true. Once a battalion fired a few vollies, it became extremely difficult to stop (firing), so the consensus was, to fire maybe on or two vollies then charge with bayonets, the enemy usually ran, and the process was repeated.

[@TheAchilles26]

Um, it is extremely well documented that bayonet charges were the norm in the 18th century. To the point where the shift away from them in the American Civil War was a difficult concept for the officers on both sides to grasp. As to the casualties, it is also extremely well documented that the accuracy of Continental weapons fire A) was better than British accuracy, due to the British doctrine of using smaller musket balls than the bore of the Brown Bess (essentially sacrificing accuracy for more shots before the barrel was too clogged to fire) and B) drastically increased the instant the Americans were firing from any sort of cover, such as the low walls seen in the clip

[@projectilequestion]

@@TheAchilles26 I agree with your first paragraph, but not with your second. While I agree that the larger tolerances in the Land Pattern Musket did cause it to be less accurate, I don't think I mattered much under combat conditions.

[@TheAchilles26]

@@projectilequestion, period sources concur with my second point, so

[@projectilequestion]

@@TheAchilles26 Nah they don't. At least not the ones I have read. You can't really prove this with period sources. The Charleville musket was more accurate than the Brownbess, true. But due to "crowding in the ranks, gunsmoke, and the general air of excitement of combat" how much did they profit from these advantages? American and British soldiers in the Revolutionary War, had the same nervous system as they do today. In the American Revolutionary War British soldiers fought with 18 inch to 4 feet (according to some Hessian Officers) gaps between each man, that was the reason why British fire was less effective in the open than the Continental's. The Continentals also used more open formations, but not all the time, there more effective vollies must have been the result them using more compact formations, when they did.

[@richardbaker7694]

Ah, the entertainment industry, history and details are a not to be considered over cinema presentation.

[@FokkeWulfe]

The Sargeant-Major is actually a Rebel Sympathizer, working to remove as many Regulars as possible in each fight.

[@jackmurphy6510]

Since when does Sergeant Major care about danger close?

[@TheStapleGunKid]

Would a group of soldiers that large really by led by a Sgt. Major? I figured they would have an officer in charge.

[@pnwfarmdog4090]

Would have been an ensign at least... maybe a lieutenant

[@joebollig2689]

You, Mr. Brandon, are amazing.

[@ccg8658]

Nothing to do with the video but the film "revolution" was filmed in Kings Lynn in Norfolk. About the time of the release of the film I was working nearby and had a days leave and went for a mooch about the town, ended up taking 3 or 4 days leave a little later to actually give the place the time it's deserved, buildings from the 11C right up till 1960s brutalism and a wealth of stories and histories far beyond what a piddling little town should have. A seriously amazing place. (I particularly loved the late medieval town gates (just googled, called the south gate), made out of brick and the brick is "open" on the inside of the gate but the outside is faced with (mock) slabs of rock to make it look more intimidating to attackers lol. Also, the carved angels in the rafters of St Nicolas' Chapel. Well worth a visit and I really must go again :)

[@birbmam]

Why does the sergant major sound like he is having a stroke

[@gabriel300010]

would explain the bad orders

[@birbmam]

@@gabriel300010 hard to argue with that logic

[@xirensixseo]

i remember playing with nerf guns seriously, one of my friends was very skilled with organizing large attacks with multiple units and forming up supply lines so everyone is supported(in a game) we had to use marching in lines since nerf guns dont have any range, and we were one unit in the field, the enemy was also a single unit, the game was maybe 23 people altogether, unfortunately, worse than that, he constantly asked the unit to retreat, as if we were in vietnam and pushing guerilla warfare onto.. well.. guerilla warfare. the enemy fought like the viet cong, his plan to win was do the same. he did not account the enemy was just a bunch of kids that were very agile and had high stamina, while we were teens overburdened with larger support weapons next to our primary. instead of steady retreating so the enemy lost momentum, we always entered a route. he never gave any order for where we are to fall back to

[@pretzelbomb6105]

Xíren Seo Sounds like you should have feigned a route or retreat before flanking and encompassing the enemy force after they broke formation to chase you.

[@xirensixseo]

@@pretzelbomb6105 exactly. also why i became chief strategist in the group later on but back then i wasnt in charge, had to follow dumb orders

[@codex9279]

Xíren Seo until you took it too far and got removed?

[@xirensixseo]

@@codex9279 the whole group fell apart when some jackass joined and started manipulating everyone lol

[@leegeddyfan]

what movie is that on the bottom right screen?

[@herpyderpy2869]

Sergeant Major: Make ready! Soldiers: *present* Me: *visible confusion*

[@basictrains6238]

Are you going to make a video about one of the battles from the Patriot? And if you cant do that, could you do the last big battle scene where the British are ambush by the Indians from the movie Last of the Mohicans. Sorry if i missed spelled the movie name.

[@BrandonF]

The Patriot will happen eventually, I think as a special of some sort.

[@Oversamma]

@@BrandonF I feel like you need to get wasted before taking that one on, right? :D

[@unteroffitzierschultz4288]

@@BrandonF The patriot contains scenes of the British committing fake war crimes against colonists, acting disorderly and being snobby. View digression is advised.

[@rj3066]

Everett M The directors made the Brits seem like cruel monsters in The Patriot.

[@TheLesserWeevil]

With all due respect, f**k The Patriot. 100% US propaganda.

[@FalconKPD]

I have to wonder if the spacing was to demonstrate to a common audience how multiple ranks work, for at many camera angles, it may be difficult to discern otherwise.

[@AudieHolland]

Nah, it's just to fill in the view with the small number of uniformed extras you have as a director.

[@DaRealPrinceofPinoys]

@@AudieHolland Ayyyy someone gets it

[@Mugdorna]

My thoughts too. The director probably thought multiple spaced ranks of British troops would look more numerous than the ragged single line of American volunteers.

[@AudieHolland]

Heck, even in the film "Waterloo," using Soviet regular infantry as extras (in costume of course), at a distance the lines show up with more space around every man as if the director had to spread them out a bit. In the final Old Guard assault, the line is as tight and crisp as you would imagine they marched during those times. But the camera was a bit closer in that scene so they could have them march shoulder to shoulder.

[@lucianocappellano8300]

hey ive noticed some things scrounging about looking at first hand accounts and reenactment videos that I just found interesting, and figured anybody else might find interesting too. in many of the poems and diary entries written during the period, there was a great deal of emphasis put on the marching of brit soldiers. i never exactly understood why until I saw this great reenactment video, in which a british group begin marching through a street. When in proper formation, the marching of those red coated reenactors is one of the scariest things youd ever see. See, the marching never ends. no matter how many you shoot in the front, due to the way the formation works, the army would just keep coming, and keep coming, and keep coming, I had seen almost 15 men "fall" in the video and yet the army was still moving through. ANYWAY, could you ever do a video on the mental effects of this type of warfare? I couldnt imagine feeling so helpless.

[@stephenpowstinger733]

Stephen Crane wrote about fighting in the line in the Civil War, and the terror. From a Vietnam infantry veteran. We were supposed to charge an ambush, guns blazing at a walk, but I never had to actually do it.

[@malachicasey4534]

I am going to point this out about one man firing a cannon. It did happen 1 in history during the U.S. Civil War and then latter on piked up a rifle and continue on. He received a medal of honor. You do want to have a crew with you to fire a cannon, but in battle can do so as he did. He did not fire it by himself once but multiple times in the heat of battle. Just for all to know it is possible but very rare. It took a team to load a gun because of the multiple steps and needing to speed up the firing. One man would take longer to fire a gun therefore you would want and need a team.

[@thomasdu7922]

Good Morning!

[@BrandonF]

Good evening, on my end!

[@stephenbond1990]

Just like to point out single battalion regiments were not uncommon in this period, especially if you were wealthy enough to buy a lieutenant colonel commission for a newly founded regiment (ie you paid for its founding), and it would not be unrealistic for such regiments to be deployed as a single formation. Though God help you replacing casualties. Also there were some loyalist colonial regiments, 60th off the top of my head

[@AbuMaia01]

Could you make a comparison between these scenes of Revolution and the scenes near the end of Zulu, comparing the two different representations of the firing in three ranks?

[@BorninPurple]

Where did you find the footage from 0:19?

[@ewaldseiland8558]

Your critique notwithstanding, the absolute worst offenses to historical accuracy you have ever had the displeasure of witnessing will be found in "The Patriot", certainly not in "Revolution"

[@stephenpowstinger733]

Yes, I hated the way The Patriot was spoiled by savage fighting and inaccuracies.

[@pickeljarsforhillary102]

Where are the officers?

[@SebAnders]

They're having tea with the Colonel, reminiscing about their days at Oxford.

[@velikiradojica]

Oh man, the Sgt. Maj. is Donald Sutherland! I think I watched the movie at some point but I don't remember anything. Can't wait for the last part, keep up the good work.

[@Elijah-my6fh]

Love all your uploads keep it up!

[@Crazed-oi3bs]

Not even air cadets are this bad at keeping ranks.

[@HaloFTW55]

Hahahahaha Hahahaha I almost died laughing.

[@Liam-sj2gm]

Tbh you should just direct a Hollywood movie

[@BrandonF]

I won't say no to that job.

[@DaRealPrinceofPinoys]

@@BrandonF I'm gonna say you probably shouldn't, while admirable your want and attention to detail, I feel like your need for everything to be proper would clash with the industry. ex: while the spacing between the British ranks is unrealistic it fills the frame, shows the massive force the revolutionists are against. Hats not being cocked to the side, would be a costuming nightmare with that many actors, Firing by rank instead of firing all at once shows the discipline of the British army versus the revolutionists who are firing erratically, Teaching a kid to play the right drum tune to the quick march. And while you can argue, "BuT iT iSnt AcCuRrate" Its a movie, and stuff like thats costs time, and time is money. And money cannot be wasted on tiny details that don't matter to the general masses.

[@cat_city2009]

Where did you do the reenactment bit in the upper video? The terrain looks gorgeous.

[@Albukhshi]

@ 13:25 I know this from shooting live rounds from a replica brown bess of the French and Indian war period: not only is everything you say correct, there's also that, as a good part of the powder doesn't even burn completely in the barrel, what'll happen is that they'll whip out at around ~1,000 ft/sec, and smack into whatever's in the way. For example: me and my adviser were doing a test to determine muzzle velocity, by aiming at a paper target at ~10 yards (the chronometer was just in front of the musket). The amount of powder and paper shot out unburned was enough to cause the chronometer to not read, and also left a bunch of tiny little holes all over the target (plus a a whole ~07" across from the round itself). we later found that if you use pure lead, there's a good chance that pieces will spall off on firing, and create more secondary projectiles.... It would be like sand-blasting the soldiers in front of them--sandblasting with HOT powder (as to the speed: we figured out it was best to move the devise to about 15 yards ahead of the weapon. It doesn't give us the exact muzzle velocity, but it'll be as close as we can get. Specifically, the muzzle velocity with 120 grains was ~940 ft/sec; at 165, it was ~1,050 ft/sec. We used Goex FFg As to the spacing: it was used historically, but not by the British (because they were neither stupid nor ill-trained). No, that dubious method was used by the -Schlamperists- Austrians (and the the French in earlier times). But even they had the sense to close ranks when about to fire: the spacing was just to maneuver in. Having said that, they did still at times fail to do this (one in four Austrian infantry casualties at Kolin was from being shot in the back). The best part? they were at this right through the Napoleonic Wars...

[@ethanrepublic4554]

I've had always asked how historical was firing by rank it always bothered me

[@podemosurss8316]

It was used, at least by Spain. Though they changed positions so the rank firing would be at the front while the rest reload.

[@cracklingvoice]

Fire-by-ranks was a fairly standard system in that time. Smoothbore flintlocks had terrible range, so you had to get fairly close in order to actually hit anything. In addition to their lack of range, they were also rather imprecise. Armies of the day decided that they could compensate for these two issues by grouping a lot of muskets together and using volley fire. My understanding is that each army used different methods, but the general effect was the same: throw as much lead in one direction as you can, preferably at a higher rate than the opposing force. I believe those tactics were initially pioneered by Turkish Janissaries, one of the first adopters of man-portable gunpowder weapons. Were it not them, it would be around the same time (c. 1400s). Once we reach the later 1700s, the methods used for fire control would have been quite well developed.

[@cracklingvoice]

Also, if you actually pay attention to the scene that it seems you are referring to (at the redoubt, the final engagement of the battle), the first rank was kneeling with the second rank standing behind them. The third rank was standing on an elevated step that placed the muzzles of their guns above the heads of the second rank. The ranks were not shifting about. Yes, the Janissaries did become a powerful entity in Ottoman politics. I'm talking about way back at the beginning when they were an elite force of heavy infantry with advanced training in gunpowder weaponry. The Ottomans, especially under Mehmed II, were one of the first empires to adopt and widely field gunpowder weapons. I believe their initial forays were into heavy artillery for use in sieges, which was then developed into hand weapons like the arquebus. Let's stay on track for the subject at hand.

[@adrianwebb6118]

NO

[@adrianwebb6118]

Dear God, please let them read some real history

[@brianpoole4369]

The British thin red line!...you gotta admire them..they've fought everyone from Afgans to Zulus...and everyone in between.....you just can't beat British discipline, British bayonets, and good old British guts...

[@Dragonblaster1]

"If it's a miracle, Colour Sergeant, it's a short chamber Boxer-Henry point-four-five calibre miracle." "And a bayonet, sir. With some guts behind it."

[@rileyernst9086]

That sergeant major was pretty keen with his spontoon. Could you do a video on colours amd the NCOs woth the big pointy sticks that guard them?

[@le13579]

Thank you for clarifying. I had been wondering how a line managed not to shoot the line in front.

[@360Nomad]

You forgot to make a video about whether or not a Confederate victory in the Civil War would've resulted in Anne Frank becoming pregnant.

[@sosogo4real]

@Jonathan Williams knowyourmeme.com/photos/1308209-4chan

[@VCYT]

We shall learn these fine moves before we face off against the EU next week.

[@gmfinc18]

"Has he been ranting about this movie the entire year?" - 0:16 "Ah right then, Jolly good, carry on."

[@MrFangsea]

Hello and new to the channel. Question for you on the Hornblower TV series. Season 1 episode 4 really has a lot with the British army. Your video has me wondering how accurate they were portrayed.

[@whiteknightcat]

Finally had to quit watching - the condescending, supercilious, and adolescent sounding narration was just too much to bear.

[@donluchitti]

Really makes u appreciate a movie like Master n Commander

[@battlefieldcustoms873]

“Can we switch?” -man in the front rank

[@kearnsey64]

They were FINALLY addressing occupational hearing loss.

[@RichardDCook]

I'm guessing that the whole time this scene was being planned and rehearsed there was a well-paid technical advisor standing there telling the Director "that's not what they would do". It's the odd thing about Hollywood: every time there's a scene with somebody using a firearm incorrectly, or there's a costume that's wrong, or someone is holding a musical instrument incorrectly, or any other goofy inaccuracy there was a paid advisor telling that to the Director (or the Costumer as the case may be).

[@kaleokaialoha8076]

Sounds like this lot would really enjoy the Sharpe books of Bernard Cornwell. Well researched in every detail and fine characters abound. For fans of fighting ships of the Age of Sail I loved Patrick O´Brian´s Aubrey-Maturin series. Most would know him through the excellent movie Master And Commander. cheers

[@davidshepherd397]

last point, when the Americans abandoned the wall, I'm pretty sure that the British officer would have wanted to take charge of that wall to determine their next action from a defensible position, so I'm also pretty sure that there would have be a double time to the wall.

[@codename1176]

Can you do a video on the tactics used by all sides in the movie the patriot?