The French Resistance - was it of any use to anyone?

He's so British he probably shit biscuits and piss tea so of course he's gonna give the French a hard time.

This guy is a retard, almost nothing what he says is true, and everything he says is incredibly pretentious. Like the MG-42/34 versus the Bren's, making a big thing about calling then Spandau's (who gives a shit) then doesn't admit the different doctrines used by the Allies and the Axis. He's an absolutely muppet and doesn't' deserve his viewer base. Few history youtube channels do.

Which youtube channels are good for history btw?

The Great War seems alright. Theirs is the only history channel I have any respect for, mostly because of the length of the project they're undertaking.

The French Resistance in France proper wasn't that effective until immediately before and after D-day, no. But the Free French forces played a significant role in Africa and Torch and distinguished themselves well on their own, such as at Bir Hakeim and in Europe.

>some beta nu male with a sissy voice hate us

Don't care

His most redeeming feature.

This guy is an absolute fucking wanker, and an idiot to boot. Literally makes his YouTube career by propagating lies as fact

How about proving him wrong, instead of calling him an idiot?!

>Not knowing how to reply

newfag detected

>>berserkers weren't real
he did not said they were not real, he just said not all of them (and perhaps said most of them) were charging madmen dual wielding axes

The only thing I like about him desu

>french men calling any other ethnicity of males nu males
kek

I appreciate your adherence to facts user but desu, I also find it hilarious that out of the entries list of b.s., that was the only thing you could defend lol. Sure is telling.

What that guy said. He has a posh English accent and wears wooly jumpers in every video, so people jump to the conclusion he's some sort of academic, because he looks and sounds like one but has never actually claimed to be one, outside of the limited work he did with Newcastle uni.

>Didnt say that, said swords were rare in the early middle ages and axes dont actually make great weapons (protip: they dont)
>Didnt say that, said to the very first person to ride a horse, it must have seem insane to ride into battle
>They didnt
>Citation needed
>Actually said that noone used agricultural scythes IN BATTLE. Even the ones shown in fightbooks are set up differently.
>Citation needed
>They didnt, at least not in the way they're depicted in movies
>Citation needed
>Didnt say that, actually said that the majority of France spoke its own variations and dialects
>Didnt say that, actually said that the elite prefered to speak in Greek to each other, like Anglo-Normans spoke French
>Actually said litterally the opposite, the title of the video is asking a question, not making a statement
>Citation needed
>Didnt actually say that, said that there's no such nation or race of people as "vikings". Viking is a job description.
>They werent
>Implying thats litterally what he said
>Implying thats litterally what he said
>Overexageration, garrisons were relatively small, because surprise surprise, the castle does most of its defending for you
>Citation needed
>2 out of 3 aint bad
>Citation needed

He's a professor of dance bro.

>using chainmail in warfare, as a suit of armor is a stupid idea. Don't be stupid - It's ridiculous as an idea that you can wear a suit of mail into armor into a battle. If you're wearing a cloak, you can control your movements, you know exactly when you're going to move in one direction because you are in control of those movements, and if you fall down you can just get back up again, if you're wearing armor things are completely different, how are you going to bear the weight of you and all that armor? It would be quite a burden for a person
what did he mean by this?

>Its another "Lindy doesnt say enough stupid shit himself, so I'm going to make up extra bullshit too" thread

Based french debunk anglo retard
youtu.be/5hlIUrd7d1Q?t=70

>defending Lindybeige

>heres a list of OUTRAGEOUS claims this guy made
>actually he didnt say anything like that
>HURRR WHY U DEFEND HIM U STUPID DURRRRR

The guys enough of a dickhead without that lame copypasta bullshit adding extra stuff or misrepresenting the stuff he actually gets right.

>Pikemen didn't fight each other
>Citation needed
youtube.com/watch?v=PbhANeJL_T4

>Romans carried one pilum
>Citation needed
youtube.com/watch?v=Be24ufxNLyM

>berserkers weren't real
>They werent
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker

>climate change isn't real
>Implying thats litterally what he said
youtube.com/watch?v=_ZHnjDJpkVc
youtube.com/watch?v=nJUhrp3_xH4
youtube.com/watch?v=0MkTISjmJXM
youtube.com/watch?v=a0iwI4LZ5go
youtube.com/watch?v=al5SZnjZzgw

>stagnant social mobility isn't real
>Implying thats litterally what he said
youtube.com/watch?v=sPLGh7TvIJA

>Napoleon was literally Hitler
>Citation needed
pic related

>le dancing armour man

>>no one used swords, axes
>>no one used horses
>no one used torches
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
>Vikings weren't real
I've seen the videos where he talks about these subjects and at no point does he say that absolutely none of these things ever happened. He's just nerding out over how lots of these things weren't quite as widespread or similar to our stereotypes as we think.

Except the horse video. That was just blatant bait so he could lure people in to tell them "gee, isn't interesting how long it took for domesticated horses to become large enough to act as mounts to be used in pitch battles? It really took a long time to breed them to that size, and even then horses weren't always used to just smash into heavily armored guys!"

He's That Guy who wants to tell you no, no, you're TECHNICALLY correct, but let me explain something you're missing"

I agree he's a clown, but he's an entertaining clown. Are there any other nerds who make videos about tanks with their own scale-model tanks? He seems like a classic, pre-internet nerd

iirc they had some gay shit about WW2 that turned me off, I also don't like the dude who does it. His voice is shit.

>no one used swords, axes
Absolute bullshit. in one of his videos he specifically describes the significance of the sword used as a weapon. youtube.com/watch?v=DiD3cI3RqJU
>no one used horses
bullshit. He said that "Cavalry didn't exist" for about a thousand years after the domestication in the horse, (which is more or less right)
>no one used throwing knives
>no one used double strap arm shields
>no one used scythes
>no one used mail coifs
Is any of this wrong? Educate me
>no one used torches
No, he says that people preferred to cary candles over using tortures.
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
vast oversimplification. he says they did fight each other, and in formation, just not with their pikes while in formation (they would switch to other weapons)
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
Absolute bullshit. He said that the commoners all spoke Latin. However, he said that the aristocrats spoke Greek.
>battle of Zama didn't happen
Absolute bullshit. This is the exact opposite of his view. He spends like 10 minutes arguing emphatically against this point. If you think he believes this, it proves that you’re full of BS.
>Vikings weren't real
Absolute. He says the term “viking” is counterproductive. I believe he said he simply preferred the term “Nords” or something.

>climate change isn't real
No he said he hasn’t personally seen the evidence of it. in fact, he admitted he believes the climate is changing (or at least getting warmer)
>stagnant social mobility isn't real
no, he says that social mobility is slow but real. (it’s true, if you live in the developed world, you don’t know true social stagnation)
>castles were defended by three soldiers
bullshit. he said that it was the norm to have as few as 25 soldiers, but more were summoned during siege. to prove his point, he points to the extraordinary case wherein apparently 3 solders were able to fend off an entire army for a while
>claims the Normans werent French
>claims the Angevins werent French
>claims the Knights Hospitaller (those who fought the Ottomans) werent French
well i guess it depends on your definition of “french”
>claims the French first set a foot on Malta in 1798 under evil Napoleon until glorious Brits liberated the island from them
well this kind of exaggerates his view. there is a whole lot more information in the video, and it’s much more nuanced (despite being very condensed)

What gay shit about WW2? They don't even talk about it, do they?

I'll admit Indy has a bad voice

You are now aware that Bridgnorth castle had a garrison of 1 man.

books.google.co.uk/books?id=m-TqPC6cRNYC&pg=PA69&lpg=PA69&dq=castle garrison size&source=bl&ots=7Gx2JWLr8U&sig=TaP-HLuPzEDuyLjfbOR1AV74Wto&hl=en&sa=X&ei=plTcU4quDsKGyATZmYKADg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=castle garrison size&f=false

Nah the dude from The Great War has a bad voice.

They did like one episode on WW2 and that was the one I happened to click on, it was wank and bullshit and gay.

>lindy
>pro brexit
>climate change denier
>holocaust denier

Yeah I'll pass.

We get it you fucking limey faggot you hate the French but too bad they constantly blew the English the fuck out

>but too bad they constantly blew the English the fuck out

Who won the war, faggot?

I'm French and I'm so fucking embarrassed by this résistance thing

It was fucking nothing and nowadays, those fucking commies and leftards take credit for it even though the reds were okay with krautz until the Operation Barbarossa, leftards voted for Pétain, joined his government and the first resistants were rightists, nationalists.

>implying it matters

I don't expect anything other than people arguing about his videos' and articles' titles, which are eyecatching exaggerations, yet I still skim every lindybeige thread.

>no one used throwing knives
>no one used double strap arm shields
>no one used scythes
>no one used mail coifs
Is any of this wrong? Educate me
All of it is wrong.
>he says they did fight each other, and in formation, just not with their pikes while in formation (they would switch to other weapons)
And in doing so contradicts EVERY SINGLE PERIOD ACCOUNT.

He actually was a professor teaching evolutionary psychology or something. And because of his beliefs some leftists managed to get him fired.

What would happen to Veeky Forums if Poland and France went to war? The board would be split straight down the middle

>it's holocaust denial to say that you should pay attention to the victims of all genocide

I hate this meme, but OY VEY!

Working at a university doesn't mean you're a professor.

>Working at a university doesn't mean you're a professor.
But he said he was.

>The French Resistance - was it of any use to anyone?
I don't know, let's ask those who actually worked with them.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Resistance#Role_in_the_liberation_of_France_and_casualties
>General Eisenhower also estimated the value of the Résistance to have been equal to ten to fifteen divisions at the time of the landings. (One infantry division comprised about ten thousand soldiers.)[200][201] Eisenhower's statements are all the more credible since he based them on his GHQ's formal analyses and published them only after the war, when propaganda was no longer a motive.

And let's not forget a mere civillian uprising occupying over 20,000 German soldiers. That's more than the German presence at Omaha beach.

Like others said, you're better off ignoring Lindy when he talks about the French. I've done so once I figured out he unironically defends the imperial system and called the système internationale "too French".
lloydianaspects.co.uk/opinion/imperial.html

>no one spoke French during the French revolution
That's legit true. Parisian was only spoken by about 5 - 25% of the population, and most of post-Revolutionary France spent a lot of time forcing French on the population and eliminating regional languages.

I have no problem with support brexit, I support brexit. I do have a problem with him supporting brexit, because he's only doing it with some false patriotic sense.

It's pretty hard to blow someone the fuck out by losing a war retard.

>why does the hobbyist historian ENGLISHMAN hate the french

gee i dunno

Lindybeige threads are so comfy.

Why did they put the archers and crossbowmen at the front?

Surely that's where they're most vulnerable.

France would probably be the supported.

As glorious as Poland once was, they're tainted by Russian backwardness these days.

teleport had not yet been invented at that point, so putting missile troops at the front was a good idea as they could shoot as long as possible and simply rearm or retreat when the enemy got too close

the idea was you would shoot and fall back.

And yes, your right, the archers were vulnerable, because the crossbowmen outranged them

Except the Crossbowmen were all mercenaries, and the French pushed them too far/fucked with them. Plus they had just marched through a bog so their shit was all wet

So the crossbowmen either said "fuck this i'm out" or their weapons malfunctioned. Either way, the French's ability to return fire on the english dissolved.

At the same time, the English had basically been ransacking the country every step of the way and the french were PISSED. So instead of sending the commoners and infantry in first, the cavalry just charged, hoping to smash the inferior english forces

This turned out to be a bad idea.

why didnt the french cavalry just go around them and atack them on they're flanks? are the french so stupid lol

Nice cherrypicking, Nigel.

Depends which France and Poland.

It would still be a dark day for Europe,=.

>The French Resistance - was it of any use to anyone?
yes, it helped frogs building their personal legends post war

The longbow outranged the crossbow since it's projectile doesn't bleed energy as fast. The initial velocity of a crossbow isn't much faster than a longbow either, but the longbow is a far superior weapon.

Although a longbowman had to be trained for 6 months+ to become competent, a crossbowman could probably become competent in a couple weeks. Point is, crossbows were far easier to train with.

>the british katana meme

Longbows were nice but no, they didn't outrange the crossbows. Not on that kind of terrain anyway

will the faggot you replied to ever recover?

They did, just think of the projectiles they fire, the crossbow fires a short fat projectile because a long one would splinter and lose control due to the acceleration. While this did mean the projectile had a faster initial velocity (not by much), it also meant it bled speed a lot faster. A Longbow's arrow was long, it had quite a good velocity retention compared to a crossbow bolt.

you still had room lad! You could have put Crecy & Waterloo on it while you were at it. This way, your 3 arguments cherrypicked from 15 centuries of rivalry would have been already available for everyone to see, and laugh at.

>the eternal anglo

trips of truth

rekt

Is this guy wearing a tunic under that jumper or a shirt?
I don't get why he does this?

The guy is mental. He said he was walking around town wearing a blanket as a cloak because medieval people did.

I'm American and as much as I respect French history, the French resistance during WW2 wasn't so great or useful

BUT Lindy Beige is the very definition of a butthurt britbong and he's insanely obsessed with the French
In one video about Malta he managed to deny that Normans and Hospitallers were French as well as shit on Napoleon
He then even droppen pic relared in the comment
Truly a mentally challenged individual

Historia Civilis

Is he legit retarded?

More like legit autistic

Well avenged though.

get fucked frog

>all of europe had to team up to beat napoleon on his worst day

OHNHONHON, PATHETIC. OUI!

Saying no one used scythes is absolutely retarded, since it's the cheapest equivalent of a pike that you can find.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosynierzy

He was talking about gardening scythes. Why do people constantly misrepresent what he says

You forgot he thinks Market Garden was a success

why does this guy have pictures of lizards on his wall

This. Compare the chinese resistance to the French. To be fair the IJA isnt the same calibre as the wehrmacht but still

user did you know pretending to be retarded is a form of trolling.

french """""""resistance"""""""

>a good rule of thumb is to disregard anything the dance teacher says
Could've ended it right there m8

This, and when the genovese were withdrawing the French knights wasted their first charge running them down for routing and weren't able to properly regroup, all the while taking missile fire while attacking their own skirmishers. What chumps.

anglo """"""""""""""fighting spirit""""""""""""""

Normans aren't french though, at least not for at least a hundred years after Rollo, amd even then the blood and dialect are distinct.

Where did he say he was a professor?

The Normans that invaded England in 1066 and conquered the country called themselves French.

Source: William I's charter for London distinguishing between Englishmen and Frenchmen.

>pike video
>literally says there are lots of accounts of pike blocks fighting each other

...

>at least not for at least a hundred years after Rollo
That's the Normans we're discussing
The 1066 ones

>amd even then the blood and dialect are distinct.
Blood was easily over 80% French after seven generations of interbreeding
And their "dialect" was Old French with a few different spellings (akin to American English compared to British English)

...

>le katana longbow cx