"Cavalry is a stupid idea"

Lindy is literally /ourguy/

Anybody saying anything negative about this man needs to delete their comments NOW

Lindy is literally talking about before horses were bred and trained for warfare, maybe you want to get some info on the subject before you shitpost

Lindy was just pointing the fact that before breeding horses to be warmachines, craving for the blood of their ennemies, people had to think: "yeah, those creature: those fearful creatures, wich are really big targets, and run like the devil is after them as soon as a single horse goes wild, they will give me an advantage on the battlefield"

Anyway Watch the entire videdo, he explains himslef a lot better and in greater détails.

>tribe domesticates horses
>tribe can now move and find food easier
>meet tribe that doesn't have horses
>somehow get into conflict
>tribe without horses is scared off by other tribe's warriors showing up on giant animals

Natural evolution from there

>poke horse with spear
>impales itself due to its own speed
>rider is thrown at 40 mph
>breaks his bones

>it's another "I'll watch a Lindybeige video and then close it before he explains himself" thread

Honestly, Lindy comes out with some weird sounding shit sometimes but half of you don't even watch past the 2 minute mark before making another shitpost thread

>The Irish are the product of genetic modification of Anglo Saxon slaves by Norman scientists
What did 2006 Lindybeige mean by this?

Where does he say that? Anyway, Ireland has had waves of immigrants from Britain, Scandinavia, etc.

Unless it's that whole Bren-"Spandau" debacle. My sense of patriotism doesn't let me accept that shit.

But user, I have watched the video, and his entire objection is that "riding into battle" is stupid, because he only considers shock cavalry usage. He also makes baseless claims about bronze age horses being too small (but hobbies apparently weren't!). Yes, you had widespread chariot usage long before you had "real" cavalry usage, but it certainly wasn't' because people couldn't control their horses well enough to not plow into the enemy line of battle before the rest of their infantry compatriots caught up like he suggests.

reminder that Lindybeige claims:

>no one used swords, axes
>no one used horses
>no one used throwing knives
>no one used double strap arm shields
>no one used scythes
>no one used mail coifs
>no one used torches
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
>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
>climate change isn't real
>stagnant social mobility isn't real
>castles were defended by three soldiers
>butted mail is better than riveted mail
>operation market garden was a success
>Napoleon was literally Hitler
>The Churchill was the best tank in WWII
>The English won the Hundreds Years' War
>british naval guns on Malta could lanuch projectiles into space

Riding a horse without a saddle and other equipment that people would later have is a stupid idea and counterintuitive.

Also
>holocaust was real

That guy is crazy as fuck

>no one used swords, axes
He never claims this
>no one used horses
See above
>no one used throwing knives
He said no one used throwing knives in battle which is true
>no one used double strap arm shields
He never said this he said that double strap arm shields don't provide you with much room to actually move the shield around
>no one used scythes
He said there was no such thing as war scythes which are seen in video games and such. He acknowledges there are accounts of scythes being used in battle but that they were farming tools first and formost
>no one used mail coifs
Never said this either. He said that films and video games portray mail coifs hanging loosely from the head when they would have fit quite snugly around linen padding underneat
>no one used torches
Never claims this
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
Partly. He claimed that pikemen didn't fight other pikemen with their pikes and that the front rows instead likely dropped their pikes and switched to their secondary weapon
>no one spoke French during the French revolution
This is true. French isn't the only language in France you retard
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
He never claimed this he complained how Roman patricians are always portrayed as speaking Latin to one another when most of them would have spoken to one another in Greek
>battle of Zama didn't happen
He never claimed this
>Romans carried one pilum
Partly true. He didn't state this as fact but theorized it based on the difficulty in carry two pila when a Roman soldier had to carry his all his equipment on top of that instead of one

>Vikings weren't real
He never claimed this he said that vikings were real but that Norseman=/Viking
>berserkers weren't real
There's no evidence outside of Scandinavian literature that vikings ever actually existed
>climate change isn't real
He said that while there is evidence in favor of climate change that much of it isn't conclusive and that global warming is only likely and not established fact
>stagnant social mobility isn't real
That was literally the exact opposite of what he said
>castles were defended by three soldiers
He said that castles weren't garrisoned all the time which is true. Some castles are very, very small and only need very few people to garrison them
>butted mail is better than riveted mail
He said that butted mail is much easier to smith and was therefore probably more common than riveted
>operation market garden was a success
Partly true. He said that it was mostly successful
>Napoleon was literally Hitler
Partly true. People did see Napoleon as an evil warmonger in his day much as people saw Hitler in his own time and even today
>The Churchill was the best tank in WWII
He said it was the best all round tank. I disagree with him on this
>The English won the Hundreds Years' War
He never said this
>british naval guns on Malta could lanuch projectiles into space
He never said this

Fucking kys you retard

>What did he mean by this?

Luckily for you, he made a video in which he explained what he means by the title of it.
You should go watch that.

>Pikemen dropped their pikes and used their secondary weapons to fight pikemen, because pikes are only good against enemies who aren't using pikes
really makes you think

Lindy is an idiot. I like his videos but don't take him seriously on anything historical.

Or on anything at all really. He's entertaining, that's why I watch him.

>What did he mean by this?
bronze age cavalry WAS stupid. But if he had just said that, no one would care. He counched it in misleading terms because it's easier to gather hate watchers than a genuine fanbase.

>bronze age cavalry WAS stupid
Which is why the Assyrians were such pushovers!

>Spearman impales horse
>gets squashed like a fucking pomegranate because inertia is a thing
alternatively
>Spearman goes to impale horse
>due to shit neolithic morale, he flinches or flees before the horse squashes him like a fucking pomegranate
>gets chased down by the more mobile horseman

Guys I think it's Lindy

holy fuck, does anybody watch the video or just view the title and call him an idiot. he said it was a stupid idea for man to first use a horse because they were wild creatures untamed, not that cavalry was a stupid idea. at least that is what i remember.

Assyrians first used cavalry in the 9th century BC, well into the iron age.

>autistic borderline schizoid spamming of this shit

It must be

Yeah, and that's why there wasn't any cavalry back then. They didn't just catch a random wild beast from a steppe and decide to ride it into a fucking battlefield, it took centuries if not millenia of domestication for different working and travelling purposes until anyone did so.

W

L

Cool argument

>This is true. French isn't the only language in France you retard
>There is more then one language in this country, it's means noboy speak it
Wew lad lindy fan-boys really don't have a brain

>he tales "nobody" literally

Sorry about your autism.

Well he's right about climate change

LINDY PLS

But riding a beast that could kill you is exciting and proves that you're a bad enough dude to rescue the president (or chief or whatever)

i watched the zama video he just expresses the point that it MIGHT not have happened

hes no professional BUT atleast he openly admits, some of the stuff is just HIS interpretations and its up to YOU to decide for yourself, promoting self education instead of sitting in front a screen like a zombie to be told what to think

Yeah that's why the mongols remained confined to Mongolia.

So there's your answer.

It was a stupid fucking idea before centuries if not millenia of domestication.

The OP is just quoting Lindy out of context for meme purposes anyway.

Exactly what he says in the video. Before horses were bred to war the idea of riding them into battle was fairly stupid

...

>hes no professional BUT atleast he openly admits
The problem is that people don't pay attention to this and treat him like some sort of authority.

In the comments sections on all his videos there's usually at least a couple of people who say they don't trust professional historians and only watch Lindy's videos.

>Monty said it was a success
:^)
:o)

>impractical and dangerous
>won wars for everyone from Alexander to Genghis Khan to saving all of Europe from the Ottomans

Lindybeige internet defense force

camels > horses

Grenades were a stupid idea. Once upon a time, a tactical genius stopped and said to his mates : "Hey, see that powder we use to propel bullets ? What if we send men to threw it directly at the enemy ? This way we would save on bullets" and the grenade was born.