Horrible Histories-Join the British Army!-HD 1080p

[MrBanausos]

The War Damaged The United States of America and The united states government re chartered the first bank of the united states. The first bank of the united states is similar to a communist central bank. Democracy died and "North American" capitalism was born

[MrBanausos]

The Americans never gave the Jacobins a dime. Then between the turn of the 18th century and the early 19th century after the Illuminati took over england in 1788. The Rothschilds demanded that The United States Government re charters the first bank of the united states. The United States Government said No. Then of course Mayer Amschel Rothschild's dud son that took over england sent the british red army to occupy America.

[e7l13]

this is a kids show. cant you people try to keep it friendly?

[MrBanausos]

England wouldn't stand a chance against Napoleon if they didn't agree to a truce with America. Because if most of England's army and Navy is in North America then how will England defend their own country in Europe.

[x66Hawk66x]

@MrBanausos Actually America used the Napoleon war as a chance to go to war with britan. Napoleon was crushed before any truce was made in America.

[MrBanausos]

@x66Hawk66x If that was the case then Why would the founding father plea neutrality as soon as America was independent from Britain? Also the battle of Waterloo was 3 years or more after the beginning of the war of 1812. So no Napoleon was not quelled

[Assassinus2]

@MrBanausos Because the French and Spanish Navies had been crushed at Trafalgar in 1805 and because Napoleon hemorrhaged a good amount of his army in the Peninsular War and in his invasion of Russia?

Besides, several other European powers had interests in seeing Napoleon suppressed or, preferably, vanquished, Prussia being one of the foremost, and a mostly-unacknowledged contributor to the Battle of Waterloo.

[MrBanausos]

As for the War 1812? The Americans used the Same strategy as Romans during the Second Punic War. When the carthaginians took over almost 90% of italy the Romans invaded Carthage. The When the British Invaded America the Americans Invaded Canada. There is also the fact that Napoleon during his campaigns took over spain and germany Which would give the jacobins three areas to attack England. South, South west, and south East. With the addition of conquering the islands by jersey first.

[MrBanausos]

Because of the fact that most of England's army was not english there is a possibility of deserters and or defectors. Other English Cons. The Americans are using the same guns as the british, The British army fights in a georgian style phalanx while the americans hid behind rocks, buildings, forts, and mountain tops. It took more than a month to sail across the atlantic and the enlistment amount of british colonist from canada and the caribbean was probably limited.

[MrBanausos]

England pros and cons

Larger Army, Best Navy, They can attack america from the caribbean islands in the south, canada in the north, and england from the east. Incredibly rich from sugar plantations in the caribbean, tea from bengal, gold from ghana, and steel from gibraltar. Cons. Most of the soldiers in the british army were not british. The red coats mostly consisted of Slaves from Ireland, Scotland, and Germany, Mercenaries from Holland, and drafted French protestant Refugees

[staceylover77]

@MrBanausos Slaves from Ireland, Scotland and Germany? I think not! Scotland was (and still is) part of Great Britain. (There's a reason they were called the British and not the English). Scots and Irish joined up as volunteers being members of the United Kingdom. The King's German Legion were also volunteers. Please also remember that Britain abandoned slavery a full 50 years before the so callled "land of the free".

[MrBanausos]

@staceylover77 Oh really so Indentured servitude was not slavery. My god you almost sound like a holocaust denier

[staceylover77]

@MrBanausos as a serving soldier in the British Army i'm quite proud to serve my country, as were my forfathers.I'm also based in Germany, minutes away from Bergen-Belsen concentration camp (liberated by the British in WW2). I've yet to meet a British holocaust denier,.

Please stop watching Mel Gibson movies and open a history book (preferabley one that wasn't written by and American) and read it.

[e7l13]

@staceylover77 well said.

[MrBanausos]

@staceylover77 I am not talking about british holocaust deniers. I am basically saying that denying that thousands if not millions of Irish, Scottish, English and Germans were enslaved is like denying the holocaust

[MrBanausos]

@staceylover77 Indentured servitude was really inhumane. You can't say it didn't happen, because it did happen. Just like the vikings villein system, the enslavement of europeans in Hapsburg Austria, Just like russian serfdom, The enslavement of europeans during the hun empire, and the enslavement of Europeans in the ottoman and moorish empire. This all happened and you know it's true

[LittleDragon2000]

@staceylover77 Exactly.

[MrBanausos]

On Both sides. The American Revolution America Pros and Cons Pros Psychological Warfare - Tar and Feathering Economic warfare - The boston tea party and the boycotting of english products Self Supplied - Benjamin Franklin owned a printing press, Thomas Jefferson owned a plantation, loans from Hyam Solomon, Weapons Supplied by France Militarily Supplied by France Cons Out Gunned Out Numbered England has the best navy during the time of the war England is more industrialized

[pixielucym]

ben willbond in a british army uniform!!! i have literally died and gone to hotness heaven!!!

[TwilightLink293]

a brown bess is a MUSKET not a RIFLE srry just had to say that :P

[x66Hawk66x]

@TwilightLink293 the brown bess musket is still classed as a rifle it's in the flintlock rifle class

[Assassinus2]

@x66Hawk66x The Brown Bess is a smooth-bored musket, and therefore not a rifle. A rifle is, by definition, generally a fire-arm with a helical groove (or more than one) cut into the barrel which impart spin (and thereby gyroscopic stabilization) to a projectile fired down said barrel. (Leaving aside polygonal rifling and other such oddities.)

[x66Hawk66x]

@Assassinus2 Musket is a type of gun a rifle is class i know i have a long land pattern Brown Bess

[cateattingmonster0]

it's tough being a solider back then.

[Atvishees]

Well... still better than the US' Army. Most of them didn't even have the uniforms.

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@Atvishees They used camouflage

[Atvishees]

@tyrannasaurasalan But not in 1812.

Would have been pretty useless, too.

[TheTraumarama2]

@Atvishees

Or shoes and socks. Hell, we didn't even have the name "US Army" until the 1800's!

Our uniforms were mainly borrowed from Prussian design and our discipline was a bit lacking (thanks for sending Von Steuben). But we still won, so who needs clean clothes (sarcasm)?

[nimrod479]

"'Royal' Army"?

[MissAnime111]

YOU 'ORRIBLE LITTLE MAN!!!!!!!!!!!

[LittleDragon2000]

It's a wonder we won the War of 1812. Of course, we can mostly thank Tecumseh and American incompetence for that.

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@LittleDragon2000 You won that war? I thought the Americans humiliated your imperial ambitions by making treaties with you that benefitted them only and made you look weak. Huh.....strange world.

[Atvishees]

@tyrannasaurasalan The War was a Status Quo Ante Bellum. It was a draw.

Anyway, the British had a lot less casualties, so they were pretty much more successful.

[LittleDragon2000]

@tyrannasaurasalan You must be reading the American mythologies. Only the Americans could attempt three invasions, fail at all three, and still claim that they won the war. You know, just like they won the war in Vietnam.

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@LittleDragon2000 Treaty of Ghent. Research it. Also the Americans had secured the situation in Vietnam in 1973. After they left it all fell apart. Try reading before you even consider your idiotic subscription to popular misconceptions. Thank you.

[LittleDragon2000]

@tyrannasaurasalan The Invasion of Canada. Read it. Or if you can't do that, watch the PBS special on the War of 1812 "a war composed largely of American defeats" before repeating idiotic myths that Americans tell themselves and make themselves feel secure - like they did in Vietnam.

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@LittleDragon2000 You took a single quote from a documentary? In what crazy, uneducated world is that accepted as true? Your logic is laughable. I can tell you know next to nothing about the conflict in Vietnam, so it'd probably be best if you stayed away from it, lest you embarass yourself worse.

[LittleDragon2000]

@tyrannasaurasalan I never met a Vietnam vet who thinks America won the war. I never met a Vietnamese who thinks the Americans won the war. "Secured the situation"? Is that American for "propped up a dictatorship" or "put a puppet government in place and got the hell out"? Just like in Afghanistan and Iraq I suppose.

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@LittleDragon2000 Might i ask what country you're from? I'd like to evaluate your country's war history, and drink the large glass of irony that it produces.

[LittleDragon2000]

@tyrannasaurasalan Saracasm is the last refuge of the fool and those with no real argument.

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@LittleDragon2000 Hmmm no answer to what country you're from? That's cute. Thanks for playing, little guy.

[LittleDragon2000]

@tyrannasaurasalan More sarcasm. Good. But what do you expect from a would-be empire that's already in decline?

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@LittleDragon2000 I'd expect crticism towards a better empire! Sounds familiar? It should. It's what you've been doing the whole time.

[LittleDragon2000]

@tyrannasaurasalan More ad hominem (i.e. not valid) arguments and sarcasm as proof of no real argument.

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@LittleDragon2000 Facts =/= an argument. I provide facts and ask questions, you simply deny the truth .

[LittleDragon2000]

@tyrannasaurasalan Sarcasm doesn't make for valid questions. Ad hominen arguments are not facts. You wouldn't recognise the truth if it were written in stone and handed to you by Moses on Mount Sinai. You've been watching too much Glenn Beck.

[tyrannasaurasalan]

@LittleDragon2000 But, it's fun to watch you run around in non-logical circles!

[LittleDragon2000]

@tyrannasaurasalan Says the master of nonsense.

[Assassinus2]

@LittleDragon2000 The War of 1812 was something of an embarrassment for everyone involved, I think, and a rather ill-considered affair. To be certain, the United States didn't exactly acquit itself well outside a few naval engagements, but the English, I think, would have been happier had they been able to concentrate on Bonaparte. And the fledgling United States was probably right to resent the Royal Navy's impressment of sailors.

[LittleDragon2000]

@Assassinus2 Me thinks the American ladies doth protest too much. US was harbouring British deserters and supplying Napoleon. That's why Britain boarded US ships and embargoed US shipping. The US responded with an Invasion of Canada that would be "merely a matter of marching" and failed. Thrice.

UK was too busy fighting Napoleon to spend much energy swatting at American gnats. Canada was defended largely by Canadian militia and Natives under British command.

They didn't want US Liberation,

[MrBanausos]

@LittleDragon2000 Are you canadian or one of England's door mats in the commonwealth of nations? Why do you insist on saying America started the War 1812? That's bologna. America never associated with Jacobin France. When the illuminati took over france in 1789 they demanded that america pays the loans that we owe France. The Founding Fathers pulled out the document that clearly stated that America owes money to the Kingdom of France not the French "Republic".

[LittleDragon2000]

@MrBanausos If you believe in the Illuminati then you probably believe that Britain started the War of 1812. And that the Priory of Sion founded The Templars. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

[Assassinus2]

@LittleDragon2000 It's never stopped Hollywood, despite the fact that, often, the historical record's pretty interesting stuff.

I still want to see a movie based on the signing of the Second Treaty of Paris. All historical considerations aside, the costumes would be exquisite.

[LittleDragon2000]

@Assassinus2 I want to see a movie based on the Battle of Queenston Heights or the attempted invasion of Quebec where the Americans shot themselves in the foot. Literally.

[Assassinus2]

@LittleDragon2000 But movies about battles are overdone. Maybe have a vignette of the Invasion of Quebec as an aside in the movie about the Second Treaty of Paris.

You know, something like...

"Meanwhile, in the Americas..."

*cut to a shot of an American regular shooting himself in the foot*

"Ow!"

*cut back to the Treaty of Paris*

[MrBanausos]

@LittleDragon2000 You canadians are just envious over the fact that America was a democracy for 30 years. Meanwhile canada is still england's property

[MrBanausos]

@LittleDragon2000 Are you jewish or ignorant? You still haven't told me what country you are form?

[LittleDragon2000]

@MrBanausos I guess I must be Jewish and ignorant because I don't believe American myths or conspiracy theories. And I can spell. I guess I must also be part of that Empire that ruled the world in a way that America wishes it could and never will.

[MrBanausos]

@LittleDragon2000 Oh you can spell, Bravo kosher boy you can spell. Try and spell the former name of czech republic and slovakia. I can. Now. You say America wants to be like the british empire. Narcissistic much? Yah that's what we americans want. To be remembered for enslaving indian people and making them work on colonies in africa. Then later became so decedent as if you weren't already jewish ottomans. Let's be honest if it wasn't for America stalin would've written a new doomsday book

[Assassinus2]

@MrBanausos Pardon me, but what the deuce does being Jewish have to do with any of this? Unless you're suggesting that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was not a propaganda piece fabricated by the Tsarist Okhrana, but an honest and true document.

In which case I'd start to have serious questions about your grounding in reality.

[MrBanausos]

@Assassinus2 Well lets see. Most of the bankers in the european union are jewish. If anyone doesn't like the european union. You actually think that if you capitalist jews loose your stranglehold over the world that it would be like the fall of rome. Tough news drama queen. It won't. If anything the living conditions all over the world will improve. Because every country will have the opportunity to be rich

[Assassinus2]

@LittleDragon2000 And who could blame them? Canada, from what I've seen, was well-managed by the British.

Still and all, the War of 1812 is something that could have and probably ought to have been avoided. More or less all the participants (save Canada) ended up looking rather foolish. (Sadly, the story of the White House being so named because the Canadians sacked and burned DC is apparently apocryphal. Which is a shame since it is a good story.)

[Assassinus2]

@LittleDragon2000 And one other thing. Who're you calling a lady, mate?

;-)

[LittleDragon2000]

@Assassinus2 Only those for whom the glass slipper fits. ;)

[Assassinus2]

@LittleDragon2000 Aw, you'll make me blush.  ^_^

[Nickkraw]

Camouflage was useless in musket warfare do to the amount of smoke the gun produced, and British jackets were coloured with paint produced by beetles, it faded to brown quite quickly, and only Scarlet officers wore bright red. Firing from 50 yards was unheard of, it was usually 200-400 yards.

[irishgodfatherchris]

@Nickkraw 200 yards is too far away (it wasn't until about the time of the Boer war and WW1 that rifles could actually shoot that far with any form of accuracy and even then hitting your enemy was less than guaranteed)

[Nickkraw]

@irishgodfatherchris You don't know much about musket warfare. I've read actually manuscripts in museums and attended university courses on the topic. Musket balls bounce, they hit the ground and bounce to the enemy line, that's why most hits were in the legs (although the medical technology of the era made sure that most of them would still die). How do you think that battles could go on for hours if not days at times if they were standing in line blasting away at each other from 50 yards?

[Lwis2]

Now the Brits army was defeated by the Maories. The Maories bilt their walls at the bottom of hills with a small door you'd have to bend over to get into. The Brits bent over and the Maories clubbled on the back of the head until the Brits left New Zealand

[Atvishees]

@Lwis2 Okay... so when did they *leave* New Zealand?

[Lwis2]

@Atvishees the same day

[baabaaer]

Practising three hours a day? That's not so bad. How many hours do modern army practise drill a day anyway?

[PhilAFire93]

Georgian warfare is gentlemen's warfare. 

[Lieblingsfachful]

@kataangluv100 Actually, if you look back to the country's founding at Jamestown, it was the English who were already using guerrilla tactics. Governor De La Warr (Delaware was named after him), fought the Powhatans using what he called "Irish Tactics", raiding villages, burning fields, stole provisions, etc. Chief Powahatan quickly so potential in it, and used it also.

So, if you really want to thinking about it, the Irish tough the English, who taught the Natives, who taught the Americans. :D

[888HamilkarBarkas888]

@Lieblingsfachful guerillia tactics were never "invented" it just happened from time to time. the celtiberians for example did it to fight against the romans in spain, the battle in the teutoburg forrest was a guerillia fight and there are plenty of other examples from the ancients through the medieval times until today.

[Lieblingsfachful]

@888HamilkarBarkas888 Yes, this is true. So let me be a tad clearer on what I meant. Using guerrilla tactics with fire-arms had never been pioneered before. Before that, the standard military doctrine had been to use dense formations of pikes supported by musket-men who would go and pepper the enemy. The idea of firing muskets from trees and fighting that way had never been done before.

[888HamilkarBarkas888]

@Lieblingsfachful okay i see what you mean, your first answer wasn´t entirely clear about that :) sorry for beeing pedantic.

the dutchmen used guerillia tactics in the 80 years war quite successfully, i think it matches the developments in ireland and england, maybe the dutch were a bit earlier but thats hard to tell i guess.

anyway, discussing about the art of war on a horrible histories video is a bit ridiculous :D

[dukes0916]

@Lieblingsfachful Not to be the proverbial Fly in the old ointment... But were not Hit & Run tactics (in conjunction with firearms) used by both sides in the 30 Years War? As the conflict devolved into a war of atrition... armies were reduced to raiding parties more concerned with 'liberating' enemy supplies than breaking their ability to fight! 'Course, it was really the Vikings that perfected the art!

[blueboy921]

@kataangluv100

guerilla was before, but in regular wars, they indeed used to stand infront of each other and shoot, because guerilla was unhonourable

[shiptech2k9]

@kataangluv100 Honestly, their tactics aren't that surprising for some reason. It's like I live at that time. But anyway, that was the best thing for their technology at that time, guns were inaccurate and from 100 meters away there was around 20%-30% hit rate, even less.

[SSTTEEAALLTTHH]

@kataangluv100

Dude, guerilla warfare had been around since the Roman Empire, probably before that. The Gauls and Germanics did it, as did the Iberians.

[Nickkraw]

@kataangluv100 They fought in lines because it was the most effective way of fighting. Fire could be easily directed, every soldier was accounted for, and it was difficult to run away. I've spent years studying it, and I'm not going to explain it in a you tube comment. The reason it came about majorly during the American Revolution is because the soldiers were fighting for themselves and were less likely to run away, but when militia fought using guerrilla tactics, and, sorry, run out of room

[TheTraumarama2]

Ben calls Jim "Sir" at the end of every sentence until he hands in his Army contract, then it's "RIGHT, YOU HORRIBLE LITTLE MAN!"

[Missvegechikandgum]

i love jim's face when ben suddenly starts screaming at him. he looks so taken aback!

[SilverAssassin1347]

4 people are left handed

[Invicta1298]

I would join the Army if I could meet the Duke of Wellington!

[DanMarik]

I don't know why people are disgusted by maggots. They are full of protein. I would be more worried about the food they were about to eat. If it sat there long enough for a fly to come and lay the eggs and allow the eggs to hatch well then that food just may have terrible bacteria.

[Sammy1234568910]

rifle? the brown bess is a musket is it not?

[drzoidburgrocks]

@Sammy1234568910 Its a programme aimed at 12 year-olds. But yes the brown bess was a musket

[TheTraumarama2]

@Sammy1234568910

It's a musket. It did not fire as straight as a rifle( like say, a Pennsylvania Long Rifle).

[Sammy1234568910]

@TheTraumarama2 yeah I know that a rifle has groves in the barrel (a rifled barrel) which make the bulled spin and travel longer, faster and more accurately. a rifle man has a 1 in 3 chance of hitting his target a musketeer has a 1 in 33! I wouldn't have noticed that inaccurate if it wasn't that British rifle regiments wore green tunics as they were skirmishers and they were the first modern troops trained in camouflage. (which is why they wore green)

[TheTraumarama2]

@Sammy1234568910

I didn't notice that your first comment was from a month ago (leaving you time to look it up) and that someone else commented on it first. Sorry. :(

[CoboltCobra]

hate to be a troll but his sashs are on wrong.

[iMazzie]

"YOU 'ORRIBLE LIL' MAN!!!!" ben makes me lol

[JollyRodders]

"Join the Royal Army">>> The Royal army was defeated in the English Civil War. That's why it's called The British Army, unlike the Royal Air Force or the Royal Navy.

[FandPrulethesky]

Ben in that outfit. Yummy

[paige64933]

RICHT YOU HORRIBLE LITTLE MAN!!!

lol ben :P

[MeibukanMaster]

Ha Ha, he called a Brown Bess musket a rifle

[Norrington516]

@MeibukanMaster - among other things... that's gotta be the worst sergeant in the Georgian army. Crossbelt on the wrong way (he's got his breastplate underneath, not over), doesn't know a musket from a rifle (I think they'd have called them 'firelocks') and, most importantly, not even any stripes! How can he be a sergeant without chevrons. He should be flogged through the regiment for a damned disgrace!

Seriously though... I love horrible histories. So much fun!

[EdNortonisMineLol]

Ben in that uniform.... YUM ;-)

[SapientiumVoces]

Ben can shout at me like that if he wants lol

[dormant374]

Thing haven't changed - the SA80 that you get issued today is right handed only as well. You still get beasted and the food hasn't improved much!

Gotta love it.

[Lieblingsfachful]

@dormant374 It's a soldiers lot I suppose, but it's an honest profession.

[LadyCasa]

@Lieblingsfachful They are honest about the fact that you are being paid to kill other people... it's a very different sort of honest work than say, farming where you work hard and mostly don't kill anyone.

[baabaaer]

@Lieblingsfachful Quite an irony that today left handed soldiers are disadvantaged when ancient elite soldiers (during the time when melee is the rule of the day) are all trained to fight lefthanded. I'm thinking huscarls, those Benjamite slingers, etc.

[RuleBritannia1707]

@Lieblingsfachful One of the most honourable out there, as well.

[ShadowRSonic]

@dormant374

Have to agree with ya there. I do like the SA80 though - A fine weapon it is. Always proud when I handle it.

[ImperialGlory1920]

@dormant374 You mean the handle of the gun is only for your right hand?

[Juristpen69]

@dormant374 Well at least I suppose your not standing in a line in red clthing in front of the ennemy.

[AuburnAttack21]

I'd still join the Royal Army, or any army using muskets for that matter.

[thawhtet8]

I wonder where is Sharpe?

[Lieblingsfachful]

@thawhtet8 He's being shat' at by froggies....

[SQLDave]

"Time for rifle practice"????? A Brown Bess is not a rifle. Ruined the whole bit :-)

[TheEmospeeds666]

@SQLDave

Bear in mind that, to a kid, a musket and a rifle are one and the same.

[stupidintellect90]

'RIGHT YOU ORRIBLE LITTLE MAN' that part gets me everytime :)

[haloww2guy12]

weres sgts strips sargets have a rank

[12PixieDust]

'Right You Horrible Little Man' xxxx

[stench63]

shooting at you... LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT

[ellybrandt4]

oh oh oh ben in uniform!!!!

[ellybrandt4]

@stupidintellect90 why thank you. Reinforcements on the Willbond-front are always appreciated it seems *takes an extravagantly deep bow* BEN!

[SuperGingernutz]

@ellybrandt4 You should see Ben in Royal Navy uniform (as in piccies taken of his character in the BBC Radio 4 comedy Deep Trouble)! Aouch! Were those biscuits great grandparents of the Garibaldi (check out stupidintellect90 for further info)? May I be a powder monkey to the Willbond cause? *Hot sausage*

[dawood1967]

b b bbb b bettle yuc lol

[K11KevinLevin]

ben in uniform <3

[Bexahontas]

@K11KevinLevin HELL YES. <3



[LuvHorribleHistories]

Nice food!  Lol

[happyhorsey14]

"Right you horrbile little man!" :L haha

Never fails to make me laugh!

[LutzDerLurch]

I always thought they presented true Facts in a funny Way, but seeing this Episode, knowing better, cools down my Admiration for this Series...

[cordeliaistheone]

@LutzDerLurch What did they do wrong? Genuinely interested if you wouldn't mind explaining - didn't study this.

[LutzDerLurch]

@cordeliaistheone e.G. the Hard-tack story. Weavil-infested Hard-tack was definately not the ordinary soldiers food. And the way the uniform/weapon "facts" are told are highly misleading.

[cordeliaistheone]

@LutzDerLurch How are they misleading? Sorry - not questioning you, just interested! I agree a lot of the sketches make a big deal out of small details that perhaps weren't the WHOLE picture at the time but they're funny and stick in your mind and I think stuff like that makes kids (and me! I'm 19) interested to learn more on the subject, so we look the rest up in a book and see what it fully is. I see HH as an introduction to topics in an easy to remember way - the comedy helps this.

[LutzDerLurch]

@cordeliaistheone Yes, HH are funny as hell, and Costume-Wise they often beat even big Feature-Films.

Misleading is, e.g., that the Way they explain fighting suggest that they stupidly stood 50 Yards away in bright uniforms, for not sensible Reason.

As a Matter of Fact, many, if not most People think of Linear Tactics that Way, but when carefully examinen, Linear Tactict were the best they could do.

Modern Tactics many suggest, simply wont work in the 1700s/early 1800s.

[LutzDerLurch]

@LutzDerLurch [cont.] A few Examples: With the Firepower not yet sufficient to make Close-Combat nearly impossible, you have to keep close Together. To deliver the maximum possible Firepower, you would stand about 3 Ranks deep, so every Musket can be fired. To keep the Troops maneuverable, the Units have to be strictly organised and drilled with formal Drill, to be exactly moved on the Battlefield. And with the incredible Amount of Powder-Smoke, the "Fog-of-War", you need Colours(Flags)

[LutzDerLurch]

@LutzDerLurch [cont2] and Uniforms that you can identify from the Distance. at least the Commander of an Army needs to be able to see what is happening. And in an Era without Radio, you cant just easily check if the Unit in Front of you is Friend or Foe. Even with these bright Uniforms, Friendly Fire occured sometimes.

[LutzDerLurch]

@LutzDerLurch [cont3] And the Distance of 50yards is well, they fought on this Distances, but in general the opened Fire at hundred(s of) Yards, and approached each other.

There were, of Course, Occasions, where the firing began at very close Distances, but usually these events were especially written down, because of the carnage, or, because of the unusual wonderous inefficiency of the fire.

[cordeliaistheone]

@LutzDerLurch That sounds awful! Maybe Rattus should've made that clear after the sketch (as he often does if things aren't completely "accurat"), as at first glance it does appear to be just plainly stupid (as the new recruit says) but as you've explained it, it's necessary - and truly horrible!

But the ridiculousness of it does make for a good sketch so I like how they focus on certain points - though yes, should've had some Rattus intervention.

Thanks so much for explaining.

[LutzDerLurch]

@cordeliaistheone You're welcome.

Well, War is always horrible. At least in the 18th century it was about as seperated from Civilians as ever, and you were, as a Soldier, not constantly under fear of being shelled or shot.Most of 18th and early 19th C. Warfare was, indeed, moving Armies around, and Maneuvering, to get a decent Position etc. Which took generally days, Weeks or Month of Marching.

[Shangas]

@LutzDerLurch They fired at close range for the pure fact that muskets are useless beyond 100 yards. They wore uniforms because it was easier to spot friend and foe on the battlefield...the weevils and hard-tack I'm not so sure about, though...

[LutzDerLurch]

@Shangas I disagree. The Musket itself was not useless upwards of 100 Yds. In Reality, they even trained to Fire at Targets up to 300 yards away. And in Trials done in the late 1700s, still some 15-20% of the Shots fired hit the Target. The Human Element wasted Accuracy far more, as it does the same today. Dont take Hollyood for real. And Uniforms were worn because it is a cheap and efficient Way of clothing and Equipping Troops, and also creates an Esprit-de-Corps within a Unit.

[LutzDerLurch]

@LutzDerLurch [cont.] The Identification was a neat Sideeffect, but in many Armies, there wasn't even a given Uniformcolour. The French, e.g. had red, white, grey, blue, green and yellow Uniforms. The Colourful Uniform was mostly Fashion, as there was little Need for Camouflage.

Once again, dont consider Hollywood and Co. realstic. Reality was more Complex in general, whilst some Points were really quite simple and profane, which today are overinterpreted with diffrent meanings.

[poppylwood2]

this reminds me of our first year 8 english class book "private peaceful" by micheal morpurgo (my least favourite auther) i didn't like it much

[MsAdda1]

i like the crunchy shell....mwaaaaah thats lovely that!!! EEEEW!! lol

[baabaaer]

@MsAdda1 They add crickets to your chocolates, to improve the crunchiness. IN MODERN TIMES! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHHHH!!!