For anyone asking why Matt is holding a sword in a video that isn't about swords. This is clearly an emotional support sword, just roll with it and any further questions on the subject might be seen as inconsiderate.

Italian mercenary wars must have been a aneurism inducing nightmare.

- This is so confusing, Sire. We need a simple system to kno... - No, we don't. That would make it easier for the enemy, too.

Probably a big reason people ask this is the way battles are depicted in movies as chaotic melees rather than the cohesive units maintaining formation nearly all the time. I imagine if two units ever did devolve into a confused melee, the chance of death, getting hit by an enemy from behind, would be so high that nearly all men would break to run toward their own side almost immediately to regroup ("to me! to me!" shouts the commander). The group that could maintain or reform their line more quickly would like be able to push forward against the more disorganized opposing side and put them to rout.

Shout out to the Battle of Barnet, where due to foggy conditions, the Earl of Warwicks men confused the star blazon of their allies for the sun blazon of their enemies, setting off a massive friendly fire accident which led to Warwick's defeat and death.

Play Mount & Blade with the unit floaters turned off, and you can rapidly experience how difficult it is to quickly ascertain if an individual is friend or for even if everyone's wearing "team colors"

There was an incident after the battle of Aljubarrota, 1385, in wich a portuguese knight went lost when chasing down the castilians and joined a group of knights thinking they were portuguese. He only noticed they werent because they were escorting the castilian king himself, but he also saw the enemy knights didn't suspect him and so he tried to get close to the castilian king to take him prisoner. Only at the last moment a enemy knight noticed the cross of the order of Christ half hidden under his mail veil. The whole group cut him down.

Totally conjecture, but I think that war cries (i.e "St. George!" for the English) would play a significant role in letting people around you know you're a friendly.

"You can hear a lot of talk about heraldry and banners, but the truth is that in battle everything is covered in mud and grime, so I just cut down anybody whose horse's head is turned against me." - knight Black Zavish from Grabow from Sapkovsky's hussite trilogy "God's Warriors".

My wife's indentured. She keeps them in a glass beside the bed.

In the Hundred Years’ War, armor style was important. In the War of the Roses, well…”four of theirs, two of ours and one I wasn’t sure of”.

Definitely want to hear more about livery. Also the systems from various periods mentioned of how a king or lord raises troops and outfits them

one point: the higher level the person, the less likely they will be "alone" in the battle nobles have shield men, banner men, companions, etc...five to ten guys all in armor, like a tank brigade

This was still a problem at the begining og the US Civil War. Soldiers from various states on both sides wore grey and butternut colored uniforms. You weren't to sure which side they were on til they started shooting at you and that was to late.

I imagine you get fairly good at recognising each other when you're marching, resting and overall being in the campaign. You know the people you're there with, if you stand in the wrong formation seeing your friends in another and people are poking you with polearms, you're probably in the wrong one. You'll also probably have a good idea of where you are situated and where the enemy are, even in battle. Unless you do the movie tropes of blindly charging in running and loose all manner of cohesion. If you're marching towards your enemy and you see them, they will still be exactly where they were a few seconds ago in your vision. The rather slow march towards a waiting enemy, with their pikes turned towards you. Or the impending impact of your cavalry force, mere moments away from crashing into the enemy flank... Also the knight in my profile picture is wearing a tabard, so an appropriate video for it.

In the Anabasis, by Xenophon before the Battle against his brother the Greek Mercenaries talk with Cyrus the Younger and set up watchword which might have been used to distinguish friend from foe. "Xenophon replied that the watchword was now passing along the line for the second time." Anabasis 1. VIII. 16-21 I wonder how common it was for other militaries to use watchwords (military passwords). In this circumstance it would have been useful seeing as the Greeks were fighting Persians for the Persians.

The baddies wear red and the good guys wear blue.. duuuh 🙄

That's the mistake Lord Edmund made in Black Adder.

They found a boar emblem badge at the site of the Battle of Bosworth, presumably worn by one of Richard's men who fell during the battle. Didn't they also sometimes pick an identifying mark to wear before a battle, like a sprig of a particular plant tied to their helmet? I've definitely heard that they did that a bit later on, but I don't know when that started. Later still, the tradition seems to have morphed into cockades- little ribbons people stuck to their hats to demonstrate their allegiance to a particular faction.

"Badges?! We don't need no stinking Badges!" (Blazing Saddles 1974)

Hi Matt, this video made me curious about some things: how many times have you seen cases of melee friendly fire described in accounts of medieval combat? I'm sure it happened often in "fog of war" cases where a group of soldiers were not aware of the loyalties of another group of soldiers. I'm also curious about when the victorious army was running down the losing army - did they stay in formation? If not, would it have been possible that some chasing soldiers would accidentally get killed because they were believed to be part of the retreating army?

Good guys are always blue, bad guys are always red

Long story short: If you look forward and you see someones face - he's the enemy.

Detailed, to the point and free. Gotta love this channel.

During the crusades, the french used the red cross on their clothes : during which the third crusade, Richard the Lionheart troops used whote cross to différenciation from Philippe Auguste troops, who were red crosses. Afterward, it changed and the english started to wear red crosses and the french white crosses. I've never seen anything about Saint Denis cross though, Saint Denis definitly has a flag but no cross, nor white attributes

I'm curious how an accidental friendly kill would have been handled, if it was even noticed during the heat of battle of course.

mason = red , agatha = blue. ez

This is one thing I was always so confused about. Movies and Tv have definitely changed my sphere of understanding of medieval battles for sure. for example, in the game of thrones episode “Battle of the Bastards” in season 6, both sides look basically the exact same besides some various parties, but when the battle starts, it is just what looks to be a free-for-all, especially how they frame the shots. Thank you for clearing this up!

Ideally, most soldiers would know which side they were on well before any battle started.

I’m more interested in how they identified each other *before* heraldry existed. Heraldry only really officially became a thing in the 1200s. I think there was an era with “quasi-heraldry” in the 1100s but I’m not sure how true this is or to what extent it existed. I’d like to learn more about that.

Yes we need more videos on this topic! Liveries and badges I find extremly interesting :))

I liked how one guy put it. If you’re facing the same way I am you’re on my side. If you’re facing me you’re my enemy.

-Sir, we have captured Earl Matt Easton. -Great ! He can tell me bedtime stories !

Can you please expand and make separate videos on each topic, sounds super interesting!

More about these topics please!

Great video!

I've always wondered this bro!!!! Thanks so much man!!!!!!!

Thanks. I was actually wondering this the other day.

TLD: They shot the guys in the big group across from them until one side had enough and broke, then you would go after the ones that were running away... unless you were the ones running away, then you trip the guy next to you.

please do delve deeper into heraldry is a fascinating subject!

There’s more to identify a human than just their badges on armour and what not. I guarantee that if you spend time in the field with people you will be able to identify them based on size/shape/the finer details on their armour, stylings and finishing, favourite weapons, favoured techniques, how they walk, how they run, what kind of horse they have the list goes on…. Amazing video though. Have to say this is a part of our history we have sadly lost.

Thank you this was very educational I have wondered about this have a good day😊😊😊😊😊😊😊.

Would love to see you cover hilarious cases in history in which people got confused and attacked each other or thought they are allies and so on and sat around joking with the other group only to find out its not or that they change loyalty like a week ago. That sort of thing. Because we know it happened.

Great video.

Good video 👍🏻

As a painter of miniatures and large armies this is a fascinating subject and new information and perspectives are always welcome. Are there recorded instances of attacking friendlies because of lack of recognition in the Medieval period as there were in the Napoleonic Era?? Talk about an overly complex detailed uniform systems that did not quite support recognition at musket ranges, especially among the light cavalry.

+scholagladiatoria *Thanks for the historian perspective.* Unlike nowadays, Medieval soldiers were experts at Identification Friend or Foe; badges were essentials.

You should have mentioned that In the battle of grunwald the Polish king told his knights to wear a rope of straw around the waist to help distinguish the royal troops from the teutonic knights. Also in the battle of Orsha, there is a great painting of it from the 16th cent. The Polish hetman(general) rode into battle without helmet so his troops can recognise him by his beard. You can actually see this detail into the painting.

All these points are true, and this was certainly interesting. Yet, I also think it's worth remembering that modern soldiers, with often very similar green camouflage uniforms, still manage to distinguish their enemies. This stands true (for well trained soldiers) even in high adrenaline snap decision situations. In SAS Who Dares Wins I remember an exercise where a person with a gun comes running out of a tunnel. The trainees (contestants) had to decide weather to shoot or not. Most of them made the judgment correctly, with only their relatively limited training. I'll finish by saying this: I have a red Sazuki Swift. A neighbour also has a red Sazuki Swift. I can spot my car by one headlight and a wing-mirror from 500 yards up the road (I literally forget where I park every time I go out 😅). The point is, don't underestimate the power of the human mind to distinguish almost imperceptible details on a subconscious level; our brains are built for pattern recognition.

I also want to hear more about military bands in medieval, in many manuscripts we can see trumpeters, drummers and fife on battlefields that might act as signallers, but we never know if medieval have something similar to napoleonic musical signal systems.

I've read that there was always heavy casualties with friendly fire back in the days.

Really interesting topic, possible subjects, the notion and development of a 'uniform', regimental badges, , trooping the color and their origins,.

Regularly the soldiers camp together for months or years , depending the lenght of the campaign. They awake in the same place,eat and all the stuff together. This sort of thing make people recognize their fellas,even If was too many people. Everyone recognizes their coworkers. Army world and work world give a feel of familiarity. This helped those soldiers to know their allies.

Large armies are composed of many armed bands. Which makes anyone within that group familiar with each other. During the chaos of battle, you would stick with your group no matter what. Breaking away from your group meant certain death. So the objective during combat was to break up the other group and drag individuals within your ranks so they could be easily kill, maimed, injured or captured..... Mostly killed, unless it was someone important worth the recompense. The armed bands of men was what eventually became the smallest group organization of an army. Known today as squad, troop, or section.

At 4.04 that bloke with the sallet and no bevor - for a second I thought you'd brought RoboCop into the story!

Even without emblems identifying the person, fancy armor was still useful help survive a battle. Anyone with fancy armor was most likely from a rich family and was worth more ransomed than dead.

Great analysis. Let's add that vast units/armies started in the XVII and XVIII centuries, with the birth of nations and industrial economies (that needed larger armies -not affordable by feudal territories based on agricultural production). That even induced a higher need for the identification of the units (not necessarily because of the melee - that in the Middle Ages were probably less spectacular and with fewer people than those depicted in movies*). We should add the increased standardization of weaponry, uniforms, and training (of course, that was already present since the Roman Republic and the empire, but now it is definitely more consistent than in medieval times). Thank you for your outstanding and utterly informed/informative videos. *The costs to equip an army were indeed huge, certainly higher than to equip acting crews. And the chronicles are not always reliable regarding the numbers involved, even since the "De Bello Gallico."

As long as you are with your buddies and facing the correct direction, you are probably fine attacking anyone who approaches you from the front.

It's an earlier time period, but one thing I've read regarding the medieval Romans is that their military manuals (Tactika and Strategikon) both state that entire units should have identical shields. I found that a rather distinctive contrast for the Roman forces compared to the systems (and varieties) seen with the shields and surcoats of Feudal Europe from the 11th-13th centuries.

Livery coats please! St Denis sounds very interesting. The French St George! Must be worth a video. Its got me thinking, there is a village in Cornwall called St Dennis, this must be due to the Normans. If you can shed some more light into how we have been subtly influenced like that, that would be interesting content. My surname is Norman as another example.

Language was the main way to distinguish people. People spoke wide variety of accents due to limited litteracy and communication methods.

I liked in Graham turners new book where he referenced troops wearing their Lords livery... and then over the top of that the overall commander of the battle their Lord was posted too. I imagine on a bend or something.. so everyone in the large sized vanguard or rearward or whatever.. knows exactly who their allies are.

Painted helmet also where used for identification During the Romans time shields was the primary tool to know friends from foe

So if you are standing right next me, you are a friend. If you are standing in front of men, you are a foe.

The men at arms also shouted out their maxims or their allegance in the battle, so there was clearly acoustic recognizing too, which was less ambivalent. French shouting: Montjoie, Saint-Denis! Hungarians shouting: Jézus! English probably shouting: St George! Turks: Allah Akbar! etc.

I saw the Black Knight's armor and a modern reproduction of his armor when I was In Canterbury Cathedral when I was in England. His shield painting was divided into 4 parts, 2 having the British 3 golden on lions on a red backing and 2 having 3 golden French Flour de li on a blue backing. I expect people also knew who he was anyway because of his high position.

i absolutely loved this episode. ive never seen that painting of richard III before, could i get more info on it? also were those yorkish emblems contemporaneous to him? as well as that, was capwells armouring decision for the lost king influenced by that painting? i dont remember seeing it with your interview of him. is that sword youre holding from your windlass line? the hilt is absolutely gorgeous and it might be a competitor against kingston arms type xiv in my mind...

I like how Game of Thrones was so well written that it serves as an example in a documentary context.

“I hope this is useful” is a great sentence to end with. 😂

0:02 by the *cake* of course!

It would be a lot easier if they just had glowing circles floating above all their heads with their commander's flag pictured in the middle.

my history teacher once put it this way: the guys looking the same way are your friends. the guys looking at you from across the field are the guys trying to kill you. so no charging around and no hollywood like free-for-all brawls for most battles...

I'd love to know more about Heladry, colours, sigils etc. Learning where that Game of Thrones trope comes from!

it's interesting to me that people always complain about the fiction trope of a desperate last stand that devolves into chaotic random melees being won by reinforcements showing up or some magical intervention, when in reality, if your soldiers have broken formation and are fighting for their lives, they've basically already lost. It's honestly more realistic that some external force turns the tide than the idea that individual people's skill at fighting in a melee can eventually win a battle like that.

Wonderfully informative, answered many of my questions surrounding this topic. Just wondering what the source of the picture at 1.56 is?

I would also add a point about battle cries being used

Simple. Each soldier asked "whose side you are on" reply "On your side" therefore no one killed each other, and they just went home.

They whistle to each other to show that they're allies.

How many layers of identification could happen? Like the retinue of a knight wears his colours, but the knight is also sworn to a lower lord who himself follows a king. Did something like that often happen, where they said: "Oh, we need something to show that we are part of this even larger group"?

Super interesting!

Old Norman , in our office , had been a commando captured at Dieppe after being shot in the leg. Beforehand in England, he’d been ordered to deliver whatever to a Canadian HQ at night . As he crunched up the gravel drive of the country house, he was challenged “Qui va La” and puzzled , not knowing French, he carried on. A shot rang out and fortunately missed. It was Henry V who after Agincourt, made English the official language of England as opposed to French. My theory is that in the heat of battle faced by peasant archers, it made very good sense to identify yourself as on their side by speaking in English, the archers who probably only understood English !! Non ?

The key is armies fought in formations. Giant melees didn't happen as in the movies until one side routed which at that point its probably easy to tell who is running away. Then you have different types of armor, weapons and even horses. For example the British used Longbows and the French generally used crossbows. The Scotts wore kilts and used pikes/longsword and their enemies didn't (enless fighting each other). Basically most armies did look very different from each other regionally and telling each other apart wasn't an issue. Only when plate became common would it have been hard to tell who was who which is when heraldry became so important. Fun fact about the American Civil war is early on telling each other apart on the battlefield was a HUGE issue. The states themselves raised the units and didn't have a single uniform type. It took until after the Battle of Bull Run for the armies to adopt one overall uniform. There was an atrocious amount of friendly fire in Bull Run, its fascinating.

In modern wars, check the helmet. Note that each country had a unique design of helmet so you could quickly tell friend from foe. And yet, there were cases where Americans fought Americans until someone realized what was happening and managed to stop the fighting.

Most reliable way to tell - you’re facing them and they’re facing you!

“You don’t.” “Oh, I just killed my uncle.”

An issue that still arises on battlefields today. Particularly on niight ops. Though nowadays one would typically affix something like IR/Infrared reflectors to their uniform that lights up under night vision for example.

Interesting, thx. I would have thought that the army commander gave out a color and all soldiers used a piece of cloth of that color binding it to the arm or something

Could you please do a video on mid level chain of command in medieval armies. Like who actually commanded a knights company of retainers since knights are supposed to be fighting together as cavalry

Friend = Me and myself Foes = Everyone else

Great discussion.

This is so interesting! Also: basically "flag football" but maybe more colours

Sir Richard goes northwards, and Sir John goes south, just remember the direction!

This was an awesome video. Algorithm finally showing quality content.

A coloured cloth tied around the arm. Simple, effective, and easily recognised.

4:04 Proof of time travel, Robocop is seen in a medieval picture.

Sometimes in the Hundred Years' War, it was apparently just a dash of red or white paint on the front and sometimes back, to form the cross of St George or St Denis. Scots seem to have worn the cross of St Andrew, at least some of the time.

It depends on the nation as well. Most nations depended on heraldry. The colors every knight and soldier wore were basically the colors of the lord they served. Professional soldiers would know all the different colors of their kingdom. Also, fighting in organized ranks helps as well, so even if you are just a conscripted peasant you can just poke the guy on the otherside. In the Scottish Highlands warriors didn't wear much armor or the colors of their lord. Highlanders served under their chieftain and would wear the clan plant on their hats. Also, clansmen often fight in groups larger than a few hundred, so they know what everyone looked like. It is even easier when they are fighting other kingdoms because they had to just fight anyone wearing armor. Most highlanders couldn't afford armor. It got even easier to tell who is who when wearing of the kilt was custom. Even though many western highlanders wore a leine, which is basically a long shirt, that kinda looks like a kilt, but it is a shirt with baggy sleeves.

Surely the style and design of armour and attire would play a part in distinguishing who is who. For example, I've replaying Kingdom Come Deliverance again and I generally identify the cuman forces by their helmets...

Thank you. Now the next time i go into battle i will be able to distinguish friend from foe.

I assume in warfare throughout history, you have terrified soldiers that run together and have a clash of sides, but after that first swing, a soldier would just start swinging at anyone nearby. Hesitating and taking time to identify which side they are on would quickly lead to one's death. Seems chaotic and horrifying.