"Besieged Medieval castles had only 5-6 soldiers defending it". Is Lindy correct Veeky Forums...

>Is Lindy correct Veeky Forums?

No
Applies to everything he says btw

Why do you guys hate him so much?

I think he's alright.

They hate him because he's progressed beyond shitposting on a mongolian finger painting forum and makes videos people want to watch.
Also the fact that he's tall and not ugly probably contributes.

>not ugly probably contributes.

>progressed beyond shitposting on a mongolian finger painting forum

What do you mean?

I mean, he's honestly not ugly. Didn't say he was a model but he's hardly a car crash.
He makes videos people like to watch rather than angrily sniping at people on Veeky Forums.

>How are the defenders going to deal with so many ladders?
Non stick castle walls

HE CANT KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH THIS

He shitposts on a silicon valley content aggregator.

I'm French

>I'm French
Throw yourself down a well

FUCK OFF WITH THESE LINDY THREADS REEEEEE!!! NOBODY WANTS TO WATCH HIS GARBAGE!!

Well some had 300-400, especially royal castles.

A moat or ditch.

No. The smallest I've head of had a dozen, and only faced a tiny force. You need enough men that a dozen archers can't slaughter your night watch.

>mongolian finger painting forum
took me a second

lloyd was a decent looking guy when he was younger

>no one used swords, axes
>no one used horses
>no one used throwing knives
>no one used scythes
>no one used mail coifs
>no one used torches
>no one spoke French during the French revolution
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
>battle of Zama didn't happen
>romans carried one pilum
>vikings weren't real
>berserkers weren't real
>castles were defended by three soldiers
>butted mail is better than riveted mail

And the best one:
>Shots fired from a machine gun with a bipod are more powerful and accurate than from one without a bipod

5-6 soldiers mean you can assault a castle unopposed with 6-7 ladders. Does that sound plausible to you?
5-6 soldiers could defend a lone tower maybe, certainly not even just a small castle.
Sun Tzu placed an adequate attacker:defender ratio for sieges at between 1:6 and 1:10. If what the turd said was true, it means most sieges involved 50-70 people in all. Shit that small was farmers' squabbles material, not castle sieges.

>>no one spoke French during the French revolution

Explain?

It's just idiotic mumblings from a limey asshole, pay no mind

...

He talks about it in one of his videos about torches and fire arrows

It was only spoken by like 50 percent or 30 percent of the population, that's a pretty well-known fact

You forgot

>Pike to pike combat never happened.

Majority of France is lawful German or English(depending on part of it) clay.

He didn't say that, he said that armies avoided sending pike blocks to other pike blocks.

>not ugly

t. Lindy

Which is wrong.

And no, he argues that it didn't happen, on the basis that people would just run away before they could meet.

Being built on top of a giant cliff or surrounded by water works for most castles. Good luck trying to zerg somewhere like Beeston with ladders.

Likewise somewhere like Leeds castle, Kent. What are you going to do? Attach ladders to rowing boats and try to scale the walls whilst bobbing up and down?

>people would just run away before they could meet.

That's correct though.

...

>"Besieged Medieval castles had only 5-6 soldiers defending it". Is Lindy correct Veeky Forums? Were so few people capable of defending castles?

Of course not. A castle at the very least needs to pose enough of a threat in a sallying force so that it can't be bypassed. Otherwise, it will get bypassed.

What the hell kind of raid can you mount with 5-6 people. Most medieval castles had garrisons of somewhere between 70-400, depending on how elaborate a fortification you've got before you're calling it a "castle".

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_of_pike

Yes that did happened, Lindybeige mentions it in his video. But that was a rare occurrence.

>That's correct though.
No, its not.

It was certainly not a rare occurrence, at least not when compared to the notion that they "flinched" and avoided contact.

probably some kind of dere

Haven't seen, but I actually believe 5-6 men was common >peacetime< garrison of smaller castles.

>It was certainly not a rare occurrence
You got any sources for that claim?

No, it isn't. Pikes met each other all the time, and routinely fought to near annihilation. Pike units, at least in the medieval, renaissance, and early modern period, were unusually obstinate.

I believe you're the one (Or channeling Lindy's claim) claiming that it happened, and thus it is incumbent on you to provide the sources.

Literally yes. Hence the towers facing the water.

Or you fill in the moat or bridge it.

>when the lord wasn't in the residence medieval castle might have 5 or 6 blokes inside, it doesn't take very many men to look after a castle, more if the lord was in residence or troubles were expected
>Mary Bankes was able to defend the Corfe Castle with 80 men (initially 5)
fuck you OP and your bait, I hope you will spill a hot cocoa all over your lap

He never said the Vikings weren't real a, just that it is an occupation, or activity. It'd be like calling all Arabs "raiders" because some of them raided some of the time.

Getting real tired of this autist. It was funny when he made weebs to face the reality but the rest of his content is fucking horseshit

"French" is really just the dominant dialect in France. It wasn't as widely spoken until after national schools started spreading it and suppressing the other dialects in the mid to late 1800s. I once heard that even into the 1900s they had signs in classrooms in Brittany with "no spitting or speaking Bretagne ". Nationalism is the infantile disease of mankind.

fuck you, it is either bullshit you made up (no one used horses, castles were defended by three people) or actual facts (no one used throwing knives, most of France spoke regional dialects different from French, actual contemporary definition of berserkers is very hazy)

And how many men do you think it takes to defend a few chuckle fucks bobbing about in a rowing boat trying to put up a ladder or shoot at people trying to fill in a wide and deep moat?

More than 5 or 6, that's for sure, given that the perimeter of the wall is large enough that those 5-6 guys wouldn't even be able to see everywhere they'd need to be, let alone stop a party of 20 or so people from doing one of the above.

you're completely ignoring the nuance of what he said or making shit up
not that he isn't wrong about some things but god damn

i know it sounds fucking horrible but they really did engage each other with the pikes if it was strategically pertinent
people do crazy suicidal shit all the time in war

So which lindybeige video did he talk about this?

What are some good youtube channels for learning about history, but are also interesting?

youtube.com/channel/UCv_vLHiWVBh_FR9vbeuiY-A/videos

>Sun Tzu theory on siege
>applying to Medieval warfare

This is autism and over simplification to one of the highest degrees.
Lloyd can be retarded but this is even more autistic than ever Lindys most egregious errors

Are you sure?

youtube.com/watch?v=HdgCq1IGmsY

>dancing is now autistic
That bitch was probably hotter than anyone you've ever talked to

>implying he didn't fuck her silly

>confusing Veeky Forums with /r9k/

Thank you for reminding me of mt ex qt gf who now is probably riding a bigger dick.

didn't saw the video

just looked at the picture

he is wrong

>Le robot 9,000 meme

More than five or six.

>And how many men do you think it takes to defend a few chuckle fucks bobbing about in a rowing boat
Rowing boats can be rather large.

>shoot at people trying to fill in a wide and deep moat?
Plenty, given that there's nothing stopping men from carrying shields and covering the workers.

>tfw you remember most castles would have been like pic related

So it's basically just a fortified house with a tower?

LEAVE LINDY ALONE. He's lovely.

>not ugly probably contributes.

lmao

In times of peace, garrisons were very small to ensure that the position is not occupied by undesirables, that it was well-stocked, and to do general maintenance.

>just zerg rush the walls with ladders
takes tons of people
also moats and stuff
>just fill up the moat
takes ages and your army needs foid and money

in short it would take too long and too much money to storm a well built castle even if it's defended by just a few people

and what do you gain by taking that one castle with maybe a few men guarding it
after all the work and probably all the lifes lost while doing it you gained a castle without functionality cause you filled up the moat

thus you invested money and time just to invest more money and time with the mere prospect of it maybe paying off at some point..

tl;dr : time, food and money are the reason few people could hold a well built case against an army

How are moats supposed to work anyway? Can't you just lower someone into the moat with a rope or something and have them set up a ladder? Then just put a plank between the edge of the moat and one of the rungs of the ladder so the attackers can just walk over the moat and climb. Seems like just a minor inconvenience.

The defenders are not going to stand around doing nothing. They will be shooting arrows and throwing rocks to the attackers. So what you describe is not a minor inconvenience, it actually requires for the attacker to dig trenches and wooden defences to protect the guys working in the moat.

in the one were he debunks the idea that the roman used fire

>5-6 soldiers
With this few defenders, they'd be unable to even patrol anything bigger than a small tower 24/7. Even in just a small castle, you have a great chance to just get in by climbing the wall with a rope in the dark of the nigh.
It's just ridiculous, come on.

Too bad that in spite of the name that is technically a tower house, not a castle.

Lindyposting should be banned.

while he understates the numbers he doesnt do it by that much, most 'castles' were pretty small affairs, mostly torn down after the civil war, the larger ones tended to survive slightly better because they were more likely to be taken as garrisons by the government and required more effort to destroy, but most castles were the fort of a relatively minor lord, a baron or knight and were essentially a tower house with a curtain wall, not significantly bigger than the old motte and bailey type, garrison numbers would be in the 10s for most of these and in the 100s only for the greater lords

Those small affairs weren't castles tho. They weren't meant to be sieged by armies, they were just fortified personal residences proof against bands of thieves and occasional lynching mobs.
Arguing for castles being defended by 5-6 soldiers on the basis of fortified manor houses is disingenuous in the extreme. Intellectually dishonest even.

it's better than Voltaire posting at least

And you're going to bring large rowing boats along with your army? Great, moreshit to drag aalong instead of food and other suppliers and more people needed to take care of them!

How many shield men are bringing? I assume you are paying them extra to stand out in the open being shot at and holding up heavy shields all say to cover a bunch of labourers?

5-6 maybe not but 40 - 50 for most of the smaller affairs is about right, as even discounting the tower houses there were a hell of a lot of pretty small castles, you simply couldnt fit a larger garrison in them for any extended period.

Not even him, but get off it. Most armies constructed siege equipment on site, whether they're ladders and rowboats, or catapults and battering rams. They wouldn't be bringing large boats along with their army unless they were traveling along a river or the coast and then they'd be using it most of the time, not hauling it around except for the final portage.

>How many shield men are bringing? I assume you are paying them extra to stand out in the open being shot at and holding up heavy shields all say to cover a bunch of labourers?

Why do you assume the besiegers are retarded? Pavise crossbowmen were a thing for a reason, and yeah, they made it hard for castle defenders to pick off people rushing towards the wars.

Clearly youve never played a siege battle on multiplayer in Mountain Blade Warband, everyone is itching to get a kill and to prevent the attackers from getting any more ground onto the castle or fort, arrows, ballista, catapults, trebuchets, crossbows, burning hot oil, dropping huge stones would all be used against the invaders to keep them at bay, which is another reason why small garrisons makes no fucking sense.

So is Lindy really wrong and stuff about most things in his videos?

I used to watch him, but lost interest.

Regionalist delusions.

Oh excellent, you're ssending out men togo a build row boats. How long will that take? How many supplies will you use up while theyre building boats that can support a bunch of armoured men trying to maneuver a ladder into position?

A pavises will just barely protect one man while he's crouching behind it. Not a work team unloaded the cart loads of wood, soil, rocks and other shit you'd need to actually fill in a moat. You can just zerg tgat kind of stuff into place.

>Oh excellent, you're ssending out men togo a build row boats. How long will that take?

While I'm hardly an expert on medieval boat-building, given that it usually took 3-6 days to build much more complicated siege engines, I'm going to guess a day, two tops. This isn't something elaborate we need, just something to get a ladder over a moat whose width you can measure in single digit meters.

> How many supplies will you use up while theyre building boats that can support a bunch of armoured men trying to maneuver a ladder into position?

Not all that much, given that the single biggest supply by weight need a medieval army carries is food (or fodder for animals if you count it separately) and they'll be eating no matter what they do. Hell, assaults are almost always faster than the "negotiate or try to starve them out" option, so if you're worried about your own supply situation, you should be pressing for an option like ladders, they are the fastest means you've got.

>A pavises will just barely protect one man while he's crouching behind it.

Yes, but that guy crouching behind it is firing at the guy on the walls. And since we're assuming a ridiculously tiny 5-6 man garrison, you don't need all that many crossbows to suppress resistance from within. That's how you cover your moat fillers, not by having a huge team of guys holding a tarp of shields over their heads.

Meanwhile, the actual moat fillers will probably be wearing some kind of armor, which increases their arrow resistance dramatically. And if your army is coordinated enough to try something like this at night where visibility is down and it's harder to shoot from the walls, it gets even easier.

Link? Or do you mean fire arrows?

garrison of pic related was in 1476 8 shooters, 1 horseman and 1 burgrave, armed with cannon, small cannon, 6 hand canons, barrel of black powder and 8 crossbows.