The Maxim Gun has been spotted in use in the Russia/Ukraine war. That's insane for being the first proper machine gun built to it still seeing combat 140 years later.
@@luisf2793 sad Ukraina is being pushed back hard now :( and that they have started forcing men of age to the fronts with only 3 days training sometimes during the early spring. The veterans since 2014 is pretty much gone, so now the bulk is inexperienced drafts/volunteers. Looks bad for ukraine now, Nato would need to step in with Manpower if they shall have a chance, doesnt matter how many weapons we send now when Russians has got air superiority.
@@Trevors_Dragons That's been a thing since at least WWII as an antiaircraft platform. Didn't see it in Ukraine but I wouldn't be surprised, they're getting pretty desperate to get rid of drones there. Another example of tactics not catching up to technology just yet.
When he mentions the smokeless powder, he should have mentioned how effective they were in the Spanish-American War. The Spanish 1893 Mauser rifle was a very good gun and it annoyed the hell out of American soldiers because they couldn’t see where the shots were coming from and led to very high casualties on the American side. The 1893 was used all the way to the end of WW2 in an official capacity. This weapon would be the inspiration for the 1903 Springfield rifle.
Not to mention the design of the Krag limited the speed at which the Americans could reload their weapons. That said, the Krag is still an awesome gun to own
I would say that it is more important to say that it was the Mauser action that made it all the way to WWII (though not unlikely that some 1893’s made it that far). And it was that action that inspired the M1903 Springfield as the Mauser action was considered to the best action of the time.
Pretty much the same thing happened to the British by the Boers. They tried to get a Mauser type rifle in service but did not have time before WWI. A funny fact to think about. A hundred years after the Civil War with the Enfield and Springfield rifles, we would have the M16. Tech went fast!!
I am a huge gun nut, and I love that this is a video now! The Great War has many videos with C&Rsenal going over the weapons of different countries involved in WWI. And Ian over at Forgotten Weapons not only does the history of the often rare firearms he gets his hands on, but he actually takes them apart and shows how they work. I hope to see more of this kind of content in the future, just because I could rant and rave about the topic of firearms for hours!!
Forgotten Weapons would definitely be a guilty pleasure for Chris to watch. As much as I want him to react to Gun Jesus, it's a very niche historical topic
@@So_UncivilizedYeah, they might both be a bit too niche and specialised in a lot of cases. I love C&Rsenal, but don’t know how much information about the evolution of the sling swivels on Krag carbines the average viewer will tolerate.
@@VloggingThroughHistory by the way, i ordered a hoodie mid February and it still hasn't been produced. I'm going to email the manufacturer but you might want to be aware of the production issues if you aren't already
To add something even more new to what you said in 13:24 there was an even earlier breech-loading design that was featured just earlier @12:42. That right there is the M1819 Hall rifle. First designed in 1811 and - as the designation suggests - produced in *1819* , it saw some use by US forces. It was even part of the scandalous Hall Carbine Affair, where a young J.P. Morgan was the center of it! But there was even an earlier breech-loading rifle, the British flintlock Ferguson rifle, introduced in *1776* and seeing limited use in the American Revolutionary War.
there were actually breech loading rifles used by a specialized British unit during the American War for Independence. the ferguson rifle was quite rare and fairly mechanically complex for the time, so it makes sense why they never caught on, but supposedly a skilled shooter could fire 6 rounds per minute.
The ferguson was the first military breach loader, but it wasn’t issued to any units, the first issued and adopted breach loader would have been the M1819 Hall rifle. Though the kammerlader would definitely have been the most widely issued.
Hey man, I've been really into watching your videos for the past year and I love the information that you provide alongside your reactions. I've watched your battle of Bannockburn vid and would like to see you react to more of historymarche. If you ever want to watch an epic journey , I would recommend Hannibal's Road to Rome by Historymarche. If that's too long, at least react to the Battle of Cannae. That battle was chef's kiss 👌 (Or any historymarche vids tbh, their content is just so insightful and entertaining)
The 1860 11,400 Henry’s made up to April 1865. Spencer production (started 1862) was 110,00 units by Wars end. The army liked the powerful 54 Cal Spencer (7 rounds) vs the delicate 44 cal Henry (16 rounds). I own 3 Reproduction (Uberti) 1860 Henry Riles in 44/40. This thin brass (I do reload my brass), expands nicely to block any blow back of the black Powder I use. More kickback with black powder than smokeless. Smokeless fires so fast (and much higher speed of bullet) that little kick. Since firing live rounds with black powder, little fouling… but sure gets dirty. I hear 45 cal for Henry Rifke, much thicker brass case, there is some blow-back.
The Spencer was 56-56 caliber. Christopher Spencer was pretty smart, I'd personally prefer the Henry to the Spencer because of the Rollin White's bore through cylinder (Used by Smith and Wesson) was used to make cartridge conversions and some proprietary revolvers, in 44 rimfire. where I wouldn't have to swap cartridges as most did prefer during that time period of the post civil war era and it carried on to center-fire cartridges onti the late 20th century. I own some repros as well as originals of Winchesters and also do black powder shooting and reloading. Keep your powder dry man.
This is my favorite era of gun design: from the development of the cartridge in early-mid 1800's through the great war gunsmiths went ham treading new territory trying to figure out what works, coming up with some of the craziest and coolest feats of small-scale mechanical engineering. By the early atomic age the momentum was dying down, and since the 70's everything is mostly a refinement of what works. We still have innovations going on, but for the most part those are kinda niche and don't really catch on in the wider market. But ~1850-1950 was really the time for a gunsmith to be alive. I love studying all the unique and intricate operating systems they came up with.
For anyone curious, "Gewehr" is just the German word for longarms. It ultimately comes from the verb "wehren" which means "to fend off/protect/guard". It's related through its roots in Proto-West-Germanic (the hypothetical ancestor of all West Germanic languages, primarily Dutch, English, and German) to words in English like 'aware', 'wary', 'weir', and even 'guarantee' and 'warranty', though those two had to be loaned into Vulgar Latin and pass through Old French first before being loaned back into English again when the Norman invasion brought its legal system and terms with it to the British Isles. 'Guarantee' was the standard variant while 'Warranty' was a variant specific to Northern dialects of Old French. ps. I use contemporary spellings of the words to make comprehension easier. In reality, Guarantee would have been spelled differently and more inconsistently in Old French, something like 'guarantie', and I imagine 'warranty' would probably have only been spelled that way once it reached England since Old French didn't use a w-letter. By the way, the same variation between 'gu(a)' and 'wa' between standard French and Northern French is also the reason why we call the first Norman king of England 'William', while the French call him 'Guillaume'.
Just a minor mistake on 2:30 Black Power has a fast burning rate compared to smokeless, what he probably meant was the slow muzzle velocity (demanding large bore guns to be effective)
While the old revolvers could hold 6 rounds, many only loaded 5. This is called a cowboy load and it had to do with the striker that ignites the primer was located on the hammer. When the hammer wasn’t cocked the striker was sitting on the primer. The slightest bump on the hammer from something completely accidental could ignite the primer and fire the round. People would have the empty chamber as a safety so the hammer was sitting on the empty chamber, and then when the firearm was needed for use, the hammer would be cocked which rotated the cylinder and moved the next round into place to fire.
You missed something at marker 11:29 when talking about the minnie ball of you look at the rifle on the table although an animation that is clearly a Springfield trapdoor rifle wich was post civil war and did not use a minnie ball but a cartridge round
Perhaps the biggest advantage that breech-loading has is that you can reload while laying prone. A significant advantage in a linear-ish firefight against enemies that reload while standing. I'm not surprised about Custer not considering Gatlings worth bringing along. His native enemies didn't exactly fight in massed, slow-moving infantry formations.
So, not fully discussed but, accuracy was improved as much or more than rate of fire. the repeater, into the bolt action, into the semi auto, each one you can progressively move less and break your shooting stance less with each shot. When the M1 garand was adopted it was this point that ultimately won over, a soldier could stay in position and maintain a good sight picture ensure more hits during battle until re loading.
If you have not read it, I encourage you to read Future Shock by Alvin Tofler. Written in 1970 he opines on how people will adapt to the accelerating rate of change. Fifty years later, it's interesting to see how we have chosen to approach those problems.
One of the main advantages of the Spencer and Henry Repeating rifles during the Civil War was the fact that if a Confederate soldier got a hold of one, he could only use it so long as he had ammo for it. The South didn't have the kind of industry to mass-produce the self-contained cartridges needed for those guns. So taking a gun from a dead Union soldier and his ammo belt was all Johnny Reb had. On the other side, the Union could make as much ammo as any Yankee wanted.
I recommend checking out "The Maxim - The Machine Gun That Changed The World" by Brandon Herrera. Definitely an interesting video on a gun design that's more than 100 years old.
25:25 I am definitely not only one who points on it, but I am pretty sure that there were no weapon designer as Gewehr. Mainly because “Gewehr” means “Rifle” in German.
Forgotten Weapons is great RUclips channel of firearm history. Also, InRange TV is a great YT channel as well and ends all the myths of M-16 vs AK variant Rifles, variant designs of the minie ball and others. The late R. Lee Ermey on Lock N' Load history channel series is also a great history of weaponry from spears & bows and arrows to modern weapons.
The other ammunition issue for the cavalry with leverguns is that they use cartridges where 90%+ of the soldiers aren’t so the military isn’t stocking this ammunition like it would the mini ball.
If he has any more of these videos meaning this is just a part of a series. Please Chris do a reaction series to his entire series! This will be awesome if he has more videos
I bought a new flat screen tv for around two hundred bucks to replace an older one I had in my room. Feels weird to think they were so expensive at times.
I’ve recommended this video before, but I’ll recommend it again because it’s similar to this video. Hickok45 does a video on the history of US military rifles. He used to be a history teacher and it’s an interesting video. He also does one on military pistols.
21:03 Another example of this delayed effect of an unprecedented invention, especially in a wartime setting, is the invention of the helicopter. The helicopter was first patented by Russian-American inventor Igor Sikorsky in 1941-1942 during WWII but its practicality on the battlefield was only really appreciated, in earnest, in the Korean War from 1950 to 1953.
NARRATION ERROR: He says Edward Howard invented mercury fulminate at the dawn of the 18th Century. 3:40 The actual date was 1800, or the last year of the 18th Century.
What Chris is saying during the "Breaking Bad reference" is that Walter has crystallized mercury in his hands so that he can give to a gang leader named Tuco. Then, Walter told Tuco that it's not meth, and throws it on the floor causing the building to explode. There you go.
I’d like to mention a few things about the 1847 Colt Walker… Like Armchair Historian said, the Walker was the most powerful handgun until the 1930s. One BIG problem that the Walkers had: was the cylinders exploded on about 1/3 of the revolvers that were issued to the USMR. There were a couple reasons for this, one was because the cylinders were made of wrought iron instead of steel. The other issue was the soldiers who were issued these new revolvers had no experience with this new technology, and loaded the Pickett bullets BACKWARDS. Loading those conical bullets backwards allowed more than 60 grains to fit in each chamber, or left air space in the chamber. Either error would build too much pressure in the cylinder, and it would fail catastrophically! This issue was remedied in 1848, when the Colt Dragoon was introduced. It was functionally identical to the 1847 Walker, but it had a shortened cylinder (to only allow a maximum charge of 50 grains), and the barrel was shortened by about 2 inches.
19:00 wouldn't that cut both ways? You can't really say the draw back is how much ammunition they needed to carry because you'd theoretically carry the same amount, if not more than the obsolete opposition, right? I get the point that if you fire more you lose more ammunition but if two sides would be carrying the same anyways then the advantage is still on who can fire it off faster.
Seeing how you are interested in American Civil War history, how about the video about the 'General' and the 'Texas', the two main players during the famous "Great Locomotive Chase"?
Well, as said, I can only recommend the video from High Iron. The video covers the raid from start to finish, as well as how the two key actors, namely the two locomotives, survived the war, and how they survived up to this day. It is a very interesting story, and rather often overlooked in the grand scale of the Civil War, even though it got turned into two films, once by Buster Keaton, and once by Disney
Even lever action rifles that used modern cased ammunition were available by 1861 but were not adopted due to the fact that a strong enough action had not yet been developed to facilitate a full caliber military round, meaning that these rifles typically fired pistol caliber rounds. Despite this there are some examples of cavalry contingents being equipped with these rifles during the Civil war. Also as mentioned ammunition was an issue, not just running through ammunition in an engagement but tooling up to mass produce the new ammunition type and replace the ball and power cartridges already in service.
Hi,Chris, that was very interesting. I do like Armchair Historian videos. What still shocks me is that the generals failed to realise that new tactics would be needed against these new weapons. Surely they should have known that.
I think it was hard because they didn’t know what new tactics to use, as simple as it sounds finding new ways to organize and entire military and the doctrines they follow it can be a hard thing to organize, but you’re right, it feels strange to think they didn’t try tests or organize some field exercises beforehand like “mm a weapon that makes cavalry useless? Well guess we won’t use cavalry outside logistics and recon”
For anyone interested in firearms from the late 19th and early 20th century, a channel called C&Rsenal makes some very detailed videos and also gives alot of the history of the development process.
I know it's not part of the thing, but apparently, according to research of Plasma TV since you brought it up. "Kálmán Tihanyi, a Hungarian engineer, described a proposed flat-panel plasma display system in a 1936 paper." 1964 was the first reliable use for plasma tv and were used in larger TVs and it only over took picture tube tvs cause of chip shortages but lost market viability cause of cheapness of LCDs but also expensive but better OLEDs especially since Plasma had issues of screen retention, burn ins and etc.
True, all German rifles - not limited to Mauser - received that designation, one good example being the Gewehr 88, which was designed by the German Rifle Commission and based on the Mannlicher rifle. (Though some guy whose name begins with the letter "M" and ends with "R" would be very disappointed at such...)
Very interesting with a lot of good comments. Not only did tactics lag tech, but logistics influenced it. While the advent of smokeless powder combined with a magazine rifle in the Labelle cause a rush to replace military long arms simplifying that rush meant holding onto details like rimmed cartridges and long rifles long after these were determined to be unnecessary or problematic. Holding onto the British .303 rimmed and the 8mm Labelle rimmed impacted the British and French machine gun technology. Facing a massive war the British were forced to hold onto the outdated Short Magazine Lee Enfield to and through WWI because changing that platform would send shockwaves through the supplies and logistics systems. So they stuck with that platform (with updates) and ammunition until after WWII. I recommend C&Rsenal’s extensive catalog of videos on military firearms of the Great War. They get into all this in painfully thick detail and do primary research, often in languages other than English, to understand how these firearms were developed.
Excellent video with a great commentary as usual! Well my recommendation is a series that is 6 episodes long about Justinian's wars of reconquest and his attempts to rebuild the Roman empire. It's "Rome Strikes Back" by Epic History TV.
39:37 The Russian armaments Minister in 1914 last saw service in the Russo-Turkish War of 1878. He vastly under equipped the the Russian Army with artillery and machine guns, forcing them to storm positions with bayonet charges, taking insane casualties. One division I recall reading about was reduced to 800 men by artillery. One of the young officers who serviced this madness was Zhukov who would famously use a massive concentration of artillery before the final assault on Berlin in 1945.
To expand on this, 30 years later, the only two Marshalls to survive the Stalinist Purges were Cavalry veterans of the Russian Civil War. Most of the Soviet tank proponents were purged or killed and people refused to discuss deep operations with tanks for fear of being associated with the purged Generals and labeled as traitors.
I would like to see you react to the unbiased history of Rome , it’s such a good series of videos that depicts the history of Rome going through each “fase” , with and “unbiased” view of course ;) All joking aside it’s really good and I think you would enjoy it^^
I would absolutely love that, but unfortunately I feel like it might be too spicy for this type of "serious" channel, but he has done "edgy" content before (the Lincoln dictator idiot comes to mind) But I would really really love that, no big channel has ever reacted to it, it would make my fucking day to see a creator I really enjoy watch a series I really enjoy.
@@Zodore.I’m thinking It as an opportunity of sorts for him since he could have a series of reactions videos , kinda like oversimplified but instead of just 2 , unbiased history has like 6+ including the Byzantine mini series
I'm surprised there's no mention of the Mosin-Nagant. It predates Mauser's M98 by several years and is still in service today. It is being used in the War in Ukraine, mostly by home guard; making it the longest serving rifle in history.
Hey Chris, are you planning on playing AH's game on your gaming channel? From my limited experience, it's a ton of fun and would love to see you play it!
There's an excellent book I read (well listened via audiobook) on this topic that you should check out. Its called Firepower: How weapons shaped warfare by Paul Lockhart and it covers the whole evolution of firearms from the very early black powder weapons through to the modern day.
@dimapez I'm pretty certain that you are incorrect? I mean, the word predates rifles, and probably even muskets - it was once literally used for things like pikes and sword, but it means essentially a "tool of self-defense". I don't know if it is exclusively used for rifled guns in contemporary GERMAN, but I can say that: That is not how it is used in Denmark, north of the border, where we have essentially the same word in "gevær"
@dimapez It is the broader category - synonymous with longgun. Can be rifled, can be non-rifled. Shotguns, rifles, arquebus, musket, airguns. It's all gewehr.
He really should have mentioned the Withworth Rifle. When it came to precision, it was revolutionary in its day. And could hit a far away target with extraordinary accuracy. :P
“the gun that won the West” is not the too heavy 50 cal Paterson (they can explode), but the 1873 Colt “Peace Keeper” and Winchester 1873 Rifle. They that took New 45 cal metal cased ammo… Central Fire Brass… very popular since you could reload them. The new “44/40 Central Fire” was used often for the Winchesters (same company that made the Henry). Older Copper case 44 Cal Henry Rifle ammo were Rim Fire and not reloadable. I own a few originals. Technically, a Cowboy with metal rounds in a belt (up to 1873) would have Rim Fire Henry and other types rim fire cartridges.
Many times soldiers, in the heat of battle, would forget to remove their ramrods from the weapon. Many wounds were caused by ramrods being fired by mistake. Trees were often seen with ramrods stuck in them, like porcupines. Also, soldiers were expected to have at least two teeth, top and bottom, to bite the powder bags open. Couldn't imagine fighting with those things.
Usually, it takes a war to push the technology. However, tactics lag behind. The repeating rifle was not jumped on in the American Civil War because the chief armorer of the US Army believed soldiers would "waste" bullets.
This “waste bullets” mentality is a large part why Gatling guns were not heavily used in the civil war. The tactical concept of suppressing fire really was not there yet. That became a thing mostly from WWI.
Whilst it is true that close order tactics were used up to the first world war, most nations embraced light infantry tactics earlier than most people would think. For example, by the Crimean War all companies of a British Battalion could carry out light infantry roles and fight in skirmish lines. Defence against cavalry was the main reason to stay in tight formations and one battle where this was not an issue for the British was the battle of Inkerman during the Crimean War. During this battle British soldiers repulsed Russian attacks whilst in skirmish order with no clash of tightly packed firing lines as seen in the ACW. One reason for this misconception is that armies of lower skill/training required the officers and NCOs to have better control and thus a tighter formation. This can be seen in the ACW with effectively militia armies fighting each other, and in Russian and Austrian tactics of the Crimean and Austro-Prussian Wars. In the Franco-Prussian War the German force was made up of mostly conscripted troops but fought in a more open order, using cover etc. rather than stand in lines and shooting. The French did the same, however most of their forces at the start of the war were regular troops not conscripts and were on the defensive. High casualty rates come from artillery not just firefights. The invention of shrapnel and HE rounds was much more deadly as, despite improved accuracy, the individual soldier had an effective range of perhaps 2-300m.
All of this is so interesting yet so depressing that at the beginning of the industrial revolution, so much mental and financial resources went into killing machines for wars where most died of diseases anyway.
Do you think the emerging carnage that modern weapons could produce had any effects on Sherman's decision to essentially pioneer the concept of Total War? That a war waged against civilians as well as soldiers was seen as preferable if it brought the fighting to a close faster? Were the tactics evolving along with the tech even at those early stages of modern warfare?
This was a great reaction video and i love all the videos you make. If you wanted to you could react to Jeremy Clarksons video on the history of the firearm.
The us civil war shows how linear warfare was a trap that could not be escaped, open order formation involving taking cover was now missing its key downside ( all this still asuming men are at around 50 meter range ) tight order however was needed to repell cavalry with bayonet lines and shapes, the best tactic in theory is to have men prett spread out with no man behind him, and when seeing cavalry run to the nearest captain Open order with minimal care will get shredded by roundshot from artillery Btw could someone comment on how rifled artillery worked before mass use of explosive shot, you are losing that accurate bouncing of the roundshot skimming off and close to the ground and indirect fire is even harder with a conical projectile digging into the ground rather than using large surface area to bounce
If you want another good video to react to about history of combat weaponry, lookup Dr. Ricard S Faulkner’s lecture. It will be one of the first ones that pops up on youtube. I believe its called history of small arms in combat (something along those lines, lol) Its a tad long but its very interesting.
It’s the same with many things for example swords, take the tried and true long sword vs katana argument where whilst both swords were excellent at their jobs, the fact remains that both swords varied in terms of weight and quality even though swords or weapons needed to be mass produced like medieval cannons were extremely unreliable, be it from say poor quality cannons due to the cannon being too brittle or too soft, to the fineness and strength of the gunpowder where too little and the cannon would act more like a pee shooter more than anything else, too much and you’ve basically got yourself an improvised fragmentation bomb sitting next to you and not only that, but the quality of the cannon ball was also important since if the cannon balls were too small, then they’d simply fall out of the barrel, too big mud the cannon ball wouldn’t fit or get jammed inside of the cannon, causing the thing to explode and again considering that most countries were in a constant state of war where the demand for both weapons, powder and ammunition were in constant demand, made the job extremely dangerous and difficult, especially in powder mills where a single spark or even a static charge would be enough to cause over ten tons of gun powder to go off at once, that was even when gun powder was beginning to be mass produced where most machines and equipment were made out of wood, in order to prevent explosions and they typically operated in the countryside out of the way of any civilians or infrastructure that could get damaged or destroyed
Myth busting: Whether during the Mexican War or the American Civil War infantrymen did not carry pistols. Sorry rebels. They were expensive, heavy, and only good at short range. A soldier would rather carry more food than 6 lbs of steel. Also, the pistol couldn't have all six cylinders loaded because the hammer had to rest on an empty chamber. The one exception was the 1858 Remington, which had a notch between each chamber that the hammer could rest on.
Chinese A: So we made this powder stuff, what should we call it and what to do with it? Chinese B: let’s call it gunpowder and make it explode in the air and make pretty Colours! Europe: Listen guys….. I have an idea.
This is not exactly what happened. They used fire lances and early rockets for war so they know gunpowder can be used for warfare. It's just that they were first conquered by Mongols, and the dynasty after them (Ming) is even worse for technological development, and imported their guns from the Ottomans. Qing works similarly to Ottomans and Russia with a system of absolute monarchy with well educated monarchs and used flintlock muskets, but fearing rebellions from Han people ruled by another race, they chose to refuse modernization.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
The Maxim Gun has been spotted in use in the Russia/Ukraine war. That's insane for being the first proper machine gun built to it still seeing combat 140 years later.
What we are seeing is the PM1910, a Russian machine gun derived from the Maxim.
I have seen a funny parody of Russia’s army recruitment add
“Prepare to fight with guns older than your dad”
@@luisf2793 sad Ukraina is being pushed back hard now :( and that they have started forcing men of age to the fronts with only 3 days training sometimes during the early spring.
The veterans since 2014 is pretty much gone, so now the bulk is inexperienced drafts/volunteers.
Looks bad for ukraine now, Nato would need to step in with Manpower if they shall have a chance, doesnt matter how many weapons we send now when Russians has got air superiority.
I've seen images of 4 maxims bolted together. If it's not broke don't fix it I guess.
@@Trevors_Dragons That's been a thing since at least WWII as an antiaircraft platform. Didn't see it in Ukraine but I wouldn't be surprised, they're getting pretty desperate to get rid of drones there. Another example of tactics not catching up to technology just yet.
When he mentions the smokeless powder, he should have mentioned how effective they were in the Spanish-American War. The Spanish 1893 Mauser rifle was a very good gun and it annoyed the hell out of American soldiers because they couldn’t see where the shots were coming from and led to very high casualties on the American side. The 1893 was used all the way to the end of WW2 in an official capacity. This weapon would be the inspiration for the 1903 Springfield rifle.
Not to mention the design of the Krag limited the speed at which the Americans could reload their weapons. That said, the Krag is still an awesome gun to own
I would say that it is more important to say that it was the Mauser action that made it all the way to WWII (though not unlikely that some 1893’s made it that far). And it was that action that inspired the M1903 Springfield as the Mauser action was considered to the best action of the time.
Pretty much the same thing happened to the British by the Boers. They tried to get a Mauser type rifle in service but did not have time before WWI. A funny fact to think about. A hundred years after the Civil War with the Enfield and Springfield rifles, we would have the M16. Tech went fast!!
I am a huge gun nut, and I love that this is a video now!
The Great War has many videos with C&Rsenal going over the weapons of different countries involved in WWI.
And Ian over at Forgotten Weapons not only does the history of the often rare firearms he gets his hands on, but he actually takes them apart and shows how they work.
I hope to see more of this kind of content in the future, just because I could rant and rave about the topic of firearms for hours!!
The channels Forgotten Weapons and C&Rsenal are great for learning about firearm history.
C&r arsenal did a series of videos with the great war channel
Forgotten Weapons would definitely be a guilty pleasure for Chris to watch. As much as I want him to react to Gun Jesus, it's a very niche historical topic
@@So_UncivilizedYeah, they might both be a bit too niche and specialised in a lot of cases. I love C&Rsenal, but don’t know how much information about the evolution of the sling swivels on Krag carbines the average viewer will tolerate.
It's nice to see an Armchair Historian video on this channel
This is probably the 6th one of his I've done.
@@VloggingThroughHistory goes to show that i'm relatively new to the channel 0-0
@@VloggingThroughHistory by the way, i ordered a hoodie mid February and it still hasn't been produced. I'm going to email the manufacturer but you might want to be aware of the production issues if you aren't already
To add something even more new to what you said in 13:24 there was an even earlier breech-loading design that was featured just earlier @12:42.
That right there is the M1819 Hall rifle. First designed in 1811 and - as the designation suggests - produced in *1819* , it saw some use by US forces. It was even part of the scandalous Hall Carbine Affair, where a young J.P. Morgan was the center of it!
But there was even an earlier breech-loading rifle, the British flintlock Ferguson rifle, introduced in *1776* and seeing limited use in the American Revolutionary War.
there were actually breech loading rifles used by a specialized British unit during the American War for Independence. the ferguson rifle was quite rare and fairly mechanically complex for the time, so it makes sense why they never caught on, but supposedly a skilled shooter could fire 6 rounds per minute.
The ferguson was the first military breach loader, but it wasn’t issued to any units, the first issued and adopted breach loader would have been the M1819 Hall rifle. Though the kammerlader would definitely have been the most widely issued.
15:16 Love the Mr. Bean sight gag
You should check out his newer video on the 12 battles of the Isonzo.
Battle of the Atlantic - Mitsi Studios. A must see for a Armchair Historian
Hey man, I've been really into watching your videos for the past year and I love the information that you provide alongside your reactions. I've watched your battle of Bannockburn vid and would like to see you react to more of historymarche. If you ever want to watch an epic journey , I would recommend Hannibal's Road to Rome by Historymarche. If that's too long, at least react to the Battle of Cannae. That battle was chef's kiss 👌
(Or any historymarche vids tbh, their content is just so insightful and entertaining)
Thanks for making this video! You are the perfect add-on to the armchair content. I loved the extra information you shared! 🤓learned a lot!
The 1860 11,400 Henry’s made up to April 1865. Spencer production (started 1862) was 110,00 units by Wars end. The army liked the powerful 54 Cal Spencer (7 rounds) vs the delicate 44 cal Henry (16 rounds). I own 3 Reproduction (Uberti) 1860 Henry Riles in 44/40. This thin brass (I do reload my brass), expands nicely to block any blow back of the black Powder I use. More kickback with black powder than smokeless. Smokeless fires so fast (and much higher speed of bullet) that little kick. Since firing live rounds with black powder, little fouling… but sure gets dirty.
I hear 45 cal for Henry Rifke, much thicker brass case, there is some blow-back.
The Spencer was 56-56 caliber. Christopher Spencer was pretty smart, I'd personally prefer the Henry to the Spencer because of the Rollin White's bore through cylinder (Used by Smith and Wesson) was used to make cartridge conversions and some proprietary revolvers, in 44 rimfire. where I wouldn't have to swap cartridges as most did prefer during that time period of the post civil war era and it carried on to center-fire cartridges onti the late 20th century. I own some repros as well as originals of Winchesters and also do black powder shooting and reloading. Keep your powder dry man.
This is my favorite era of gun design: from the development of the cartridge in early-mid 1800's through the great war gunsmiths went ham treading new territory trying to figure out what works, coming up with some of the craziest and coolest feats of small-scale mechanical engineering. By the early atomic age the momentum was dying down, and since the 70's everything is mostly a refinement of what works. We still have innovations going on, but for the most part those are kinda niche and don't really catch on in the wider market.
But ~1850-1950 was really the time for a gunsmith to be alive. I love studying all the unique and intricate operating systems they came up with.
For anyone curious, "Gewehr" is just the German word for longarms. It ultimately comes from the verb "wehren" which means "to fend off/protect/guard". It's related through its roots in Proto-West-Germanic (the hypothetical ancestor of all West Germanic languages, primarily Dutch, English, and German) to words in English like 'aware', 'wary', 'weir', and even 'guarantee' and 'warranty', though those two had to be loaned into Vulgar Latin and pass through Old French first before being loaned back into English again when the Norman invasion brought its legal system and terms with it to the British Isles.
'Guarantee' was the standard variant while 'Warranty' was a variant specific to Northern dialects of Old French.
ps. I use contemporary spellings of the words to make comprehension easier. In reality, Guarantee would have been spelled differently and more inconsistently in Old French, something like 'guarantie', and I imagine 'warranty' would probably have only been spelled that way once it reached England since Old French didn't use a w-letter.
By the way, the same variation between 'gu(a)' and 'wa' between standard French and Northern French is also the reason why we call the first Norman king of England 'William', while the French call him 'Guillaume'.
Just trying my luck and asking for “The greatest raid of all” reaction again 😂
Great insight and discussion as always Chris 👍🏻
Just a minor mistake on 2:30 Black Power has a fast burning rate compared to smokeless, what he probably meant was the slow muzzle velocity (demanding large bore guns to be effective)
While the old revolvers could hold 6 rounds, many only loaded 5. This is called a cowboy load and it had to do with the striker that ignites the primer was located on the hammer. When the hammer wasn’t cocked the striker was sitting on the primer. The slightest bump on the hammer from something completely accidental could ignite the primer and fire the round. People would have the empty chamber as a safety so the hammer was sitting on the empty chamber, and then when the firearm was needed for use, the hammer would be cocked which rotated the cylinder and moved the next round into place to fire.
3:20 I'm not sure if this is true or not but I heard something about gunpowder being made using bat droppings from the walls of caves...
You missed something at marker 11:29 when talking about the minnie ball of you look at the rifle on the table although an animation that is clearly a Springfield trapdoor rifle wich was post civil war and did not use a minnie ball but a cartridge round
Perhaps the biggest advantage that breech-loading has is that you can reload while laying prone. A significant advantage in a linear-ish firefight against enemies that reload while standing.
I'm not surprised about Custer not considering Gatlings worth bringing along. His native enemies didn't exactly fight in massed, slow-moving infantry formations.
So, not fully discussed but, accuracy was improved as much or more than rate of fire. the repeater, into the bolt action, into the semi auto, each one you can progressively move less and break your shooting stance less with each shot. When the M1 garand was adopted it was this point that ultimately won over, a soldier could stay in position and maintain a good sight picture ensure more hits during battle until re loading.
If you have not read it, I encourage you to read Future Shock by Alvin Tofler. Written in 1970 he opines on how people will adapt to the accelerating rate of change. Fifty years later, it's interesting to see how we have chosen to approach those problems.
The Maxim gun is still being used today on the frontline in Ukraine. Crazy to think about
Specifically the PM M1910.
And the Mosin Nagant
One of the main advantages of the Spencer and Henry Repeating rifles during the Civil War was the fact that if a Confederate soldier got a hold of one, he could only use it so long as he had ammo for it. The South didn't have the kind of industry to mass-produce the self-contained cartridges needed for those guns. So taking a gun from a dead Union soldier and his ammo belt was all Johnny Reb had. On the other side, the Union could make as much ammo as any Yankee wanted.
Hey, Tony Romo you missed the Demolition Man reference at 23:15 lol!!!
I recommend checking out "The Maxim - The Machine Gun That Changed The World" by Brandon Herrera. Definitely an interesting video on a gun design that's more than 100 years old.
25:25
I am definitely not only one who points on it, but I am pretty sure that there were no weapon designer as Gewehr.
Mainly because “Gewehr” means “Rifle” in German.
Forgotten Weapons is great RUclips channel of firearm history. Also, InRange TV is a great YT channel as well and ends all the myths of M-16 vs AK variant Rifles, variant designs of the minie ball and others. The late R. Lee Ermey on Lock N' Load history channel series is also a great history of weaponry from spears & bows and arrows to modern weapons.
The other ammunition issue for the cavalry with leverguns is that they use cartridges where 90%+ of the soldiers aren’t so the military isn’t stocking this ammunition like it would the mini ball.
If he has any more of these videos meaning this is just a part of a series. Please Chris do a reaction series to his entire series! This will be awesome if he has more videos
Theirs no more
Mercury fulminate.
I watched that scene yesterday. On a BB kick this week.
Breaking Bad and Justified are to me the best written and acted shows in recent memory.
I bought a new flat screen tv for around two hundred bucks to replace an older one I had in my room. Feels weird to think they were so expensive at times.
I love this channel so much
I’ve recommended this video before, but I’ll recommend it again because it’s similar to this video. Hickok45 does a video on the history of US military rifles. He used to be a history teacher and it’s an interesting video. He also does one on military pistols.
21:03 Another example of this delayed effect of an unprecedented invention, especially in a wartime setting, is the invention of the helicopter. The helicopter was first patented by Russian-American inventor Igor Sikorsky in 1941-1942 during WWII but its practicality on the battlefield was only really appreciated, in earnest, in the Korean War from 1950 to 1953.
NARRATION ERROR: He says Edward Howard invented mercury fulminate at the dawn of the 18th Century. 3:40
The actual date was 1800, or the last year of the 18th Century.
What Chris is saying during the "Breaking Bad reference" is that Walter has crystallized mercury in his hands so that he can give to a gang leader named Tuco. Then, Walter told Tuco that it's not meth, and throws it on the floor causing the building to explode. There you go.
I’d like to mention a few things about the 1847 Colt Walker…
Like Armchair Historian said, the Walker was the most powerful handgun until the 1930s. One BIG problem that the Walkers had: was the cylinders exploded on about 1/3 of the revolvers that were issued to the USMR. There were a couple reasons for this, one was because the cylinders were made of wrought iron instead of steel. The other issue was the soldiers who were issued these new revolvers had no experience with this new technology, and loaded the Pickett bullets BACKWARDS. Loading those conical bullets backwards allowed more than 60 grains to fit in each chamber, or left air space in the chamber. Either error would build too much pressure in the cylinder, and it would fail catastrophically!
This issue was remedied in 1848, when the Colt Dragoon was introduced. It was functionally identical to the 1847 Walker, but it had a shortened cylinder (to only allow a maximum charge of 50 grains), and the barrel was shortened by about 2 inches.
23:10 Demolition Man!
19:00 wouldn't that cut both ways? You can't really say the draw back is how much ammunition they needed to carry because you'd theoretically carry the same amount, if not more than the obsolete opposition, right?
I get the point that if you fire more you lose more ammunition but if two sides would be carrying the same anyways then the advantage is still on who can fire it off faster.
Seeing how you are interested in American Civil War history, how about the video about the 'General' and the 'Texas', the two main players during the famous "Great Locomotive Chase"?
I covered it briefly in my visit to the Chattanooga National Cemetery but yeah I should do something more in depth at some point
Well, as said, I can only recommend the video from High Iron. The video covers the raid from start to finish, as well as how the two key actors, namely the two locomotives, survived the war, and how they survived up to this day. It is a very interesting story, and rather often overlooked in the grand scale of the Civil War, even though it got turned into two films, once by Buster Keaton, and once by Disney
Even lever action rifles that used modern cased ammunition were available by 1861 but were not adopted due to the fact that a strong enough action had not yet been developed to facilitate a full caliber military round, meaning that these rifles typically fired pistol caliber rounds. Despite this there are some examples of cavalry contingents being equipped with these rifles during the Civil war. Also as mentioned ammunition was an issue, not just running through ammunition in an engagement but tooling up to mass produce the new ammunition type and replace the ball and power cartridges already in service.
Guess I commented too soon!
That Mr. Bean reference in the part about the needle gun really made me laugh.
If you want more firearm history check out forgotten weapons on RUclips.
Hi,Chris, that was very interesting. I do like Armchair Historian videos. What still shocks me is that the generals failed to realise that new tactics would be needed against these new weapons. Surely they should have known that.
I think it was hard because they didn’t know what new tactics to use, as simple as it sounds finding new ways to organize and entire military and the doctrines they follow it can be a hard thing to organize, but you’re right, it feels strange to think they didn’t try tests or organize some field exercises beforehand like “mm a weapon that makes cavalry useless? Well guess we won’t use cavalry outside logistics and recon”
Did you hear what he said @29:45
30:59
Fire and Maneuver is going to add the Boshin War soon!
For anyone interested in firearms from the late 19th and early 20th century, a channel called C&Rsenal makes some very detailed videos and also gives alot of the history of the development process.
I know it's not part of the thing, but apparently, according to research of Plasma TV since you brought it up.
"Kálmán Tihanyi, a Hungarian engineer, described a proposed flat-panel plasma display system in a 1936 paper."
1964 was the first reliable use for plasma tv and were used in larger TVs and it only over took picture tube tvs cause of chip shortages but lost market viability cause of cheapness of LCDs but also expensive but better OLEDs especially since Plasma had issues of screen retention, burn ins and etc.
Quick thing
Gewehr isn’t a name
It’s the German word for rifle 24:55
True, all German rifles - not limited to Mauser - received that designation, one good example being the Gewehr 88, which was designed by the German Rifle Commission and based on the Mannlicher rifle.
(Though some guy whose name begins with the letter "M" and ends with "R" would be very disappointed at such...)
The Wesley Snipes Demolition Man reference at 23:14. :-D
Ah the good old Maxim, still in use today
Very interesting with a lot of good comments. Not only did tactics lag tech, but logistics influenced it. While the advent of smokeless powder combined with a magazine rifle in the Labelle cause a rush to replace military long arms simplifying that rush meant holding onto details like rimmed cartridges and long rifles long after these were determined to be unnecessary or problematic. Holding onto the British .303 rimmed and the 8mm Labelle rimmed impacted the British and French machine gun technology. Facing a massive war the British were forced to hold onto the outdated Short Magazine Lee Enfield to and through WWI because changing that platform would send shockwaves through the supplies and logistics systems. So they stuck with that platform (with updates) and ammunition until after WWII.
I recommend C&Rsenal’s extensive catalog of videos on military firearms of the Great War. They get into all this in painfully thick detail and do primary research, often in languages other than English, to understand how these firearms were developed.
Excellent video with a great commentary as usual! Well my recommendation is a series that is 6 episodes long about Justinian's wars of reconquest and his attempts to rebuild the Roman empire.
It's "Rome Strikes Back" by Epic History TV.
i kinda love guns one of my favorite is the ppk from the bond movies and would love to have one
39:37 The Russian armaments Minister in 1914 last saw service in the Russo-Turkish War of 1878. He vastly under equipped the the Russian Army with artillery and machine guns, forcing them to storm positions with bayonet charges, taking insane casualties. One division I recall reading about was reduced to 800 men by artillery. One of the young officers who serviced this madness was Zhukov who would famously use a massive concentration of artillery before the final assault on Berlin in 1945.
To expand on this, 30 years later, the only two Marshalls to survive the Stalinist Purges were Cavalry veterans of the Russian Civil War. Most of the Soviet tank proponents were purged or killed and people refused to discuss deep operations with tanks for fear of being associated with the purged Generals and labeled as traitors.
I would like to see you react to the unbiased history of Rome , it’s such a good series of videos that depicts the history of Rome going through each “fase” , with and “unbiased” view of course ;)
All joking aside it’s really good and I think you would enjoy it^^
I would absolutely love that, but unfortunately I feel like it might be too spicy for this type of "serious" channel, but he has done "edgy" content before (the Lincoln dictator idiot comes to mind)
But I would really really love that, no big channel has ever reacted to it, it would make my fucking day to see a creator I really enjoy watch a series I really enjoy.
@@Zodore.I’m thinking It as an opportunity of sorts for him since he could have a series of reactions videos , kinda like oversimplified but instead of just 2 , unbiased history has like 6+ including the Byzantine mini series
I'm surprised there's no mention of the Mosin-Nagant. It predates Mauser's M98 by several years and is still in service today. It is being used in the War in Ukraine, mostly by home guard; making it the longest serving rifle in history.
Watching videos like this just makes me want to go play civ
Hey Chris, are you planning on playing AH's game on your gaming channel? From my limited experience, it's a ton of fun and would love to see you play it!
There's an excellent book I read (well listened via audiobook) on this topic that you should check out. Its called Firepower: How weapons shaped warfare by Paul Lockhart and it covers the whole evolution of firearms from the very early black powder weapons through to the modern day.
Great video, Chris - although "Gewehr" is not a name, like Mauser or Lee-Enfield. It's a word for a longgun, basically.
@dimapez I'm pretty certain that you are incorrect?
I mean, the word predates rifles, and probably even muskets - it was once literally used for things like pikes and sword, but it means essentially a "tool of self-defense". I don't know if it is exclusively used for rifled guns in contemporary GERMAN, but I can say that: That is not how it is used in Denmark, north of the border, where we have essentially the same word in "gevær"
@dimapez It is the broader category - synonymous with longgun. Can be rifled, can be non-rifled. Shotguns, rifles, arquebus, musket, airguns. It's all gewehr.
Can you do a reaction video regarding Roswell? I’d like to see your take on the events.
FYI gewehr isn't a proper noun/name, it is the German word for "rifle". The STG 44 (Sturmgewehr) translates to storm rifle.
He really should have mentioned the Withworth Rifle. When it came to precision, it was revolutionary in its day. And could hit a far away target with extraordinary accuracy. :P
He might have chosen that dates because the 1918 designed M2 (Ma Deuce) has represented the apex of the machine gun technology.
“the gun that won the West” is not the too heavy 50 cal Paterson (they can explode), but the 1873 Colt “Peace Keeper” and Winchester 1873 Rifle. They that took New 45 cal metal cased ammo… Central Fire Brass… very popular since you could reload them. The new “44/40 Central Fire” was used often for the Winchesters (same company that made the Henry). Older Copper case 44 Cal Henry Rifle ammo were Rim Fire and not reloadable. I own a few originals. Technically, a Cowboy with metal rounds in a belt (up to 1873) would have Rim Fire Henry and other types rim fire cartridges.
The halls rifle was a breech loading rifle built early in the 1800s
Many times soldiers, in the heat of battle, would forget to remove their ramrods from the weapon. Many wounds were caused by ramrods being fired by mistake. Trees were often seen with ramrods stuck in them, like porcupines. Also, soldiers were expected to have at least two teeth, top and bottom, to bite the powder bags open. Couldn't imagine fighting with those things.
Usually, it takes a war to push the technology. However, tactics lag behind. The repeating rifle was not jumped on in the American Civil War because the chief armorer of the US Army believed soldiers would "waste" bullets.
This “waste bullets” mentality is a large part why Gatling guns were not heavily used in the civil war. The tactical concept of suppressing fire really was not there yet. That became a thing mostly from WWI.
I thought the US army was slow to adapt the repeating riffle because it was too expensive to manufacture at the time?
15:17 Mr bean reference
Whilst it is true that close order tactics were used up to the first world war, most nations embraced light infantry tactics earlier than most people would think. For example, by the Crimean War all companies of a British Battalion could carry out light infantry roles and fight in skirmish lines. Defence against cavalry was the main reason to stay in tight formations and one battle where this was not an issue for the British was the battle of Inkerman during the Crimean War. During this battle British soldiers repulsed Russian attacks whilst in skirmish order with no clash of tightly packed firing lines as seen in the ACW.
One reason for this misconception is that armies of lower skill/training required the officers and NCOs to have better control and thus a tighter formation. This can be seen in the ACW with effectively militia armies fighting each other, and in Russian and Austrian tactics of the Crimean and Austro-Prussian Wars. In the Franco-Prussian War the German force was made up of mostly conscripted troops but fought in a more open order, using cover etc. rather than stand in lines and shooting. The French did the same, however most of their forces at the start of the war were regular troops not conscripts and were on the defensive. High casualty rates come from artillery not just firefights. The invention of shrapnel and HE rounds was much more deadly as, despite improved accuracy, the individual soldier had an effective range of perhaps 2-300m.
Great video
Why did I only now notice his background is animated while he and his desk and the things on it are real?
All of this is so interesting yet so depressing that at the beginning of the industrial revolution, so much mental and financial resources went into killing machines for wars where most died of diseases anyway.
27:30 the Ukrainian defenders of Bakhmut are using Maxim guns in small numbers. I kid you not!
I have an old 44 Colt Revolver that I inherited. It's in a wooden box and probably hasn't been fired in 100 years
Evolution of rifles is really fascinating.
Do you think the emerging carnage that modern weapons could produce had any effects on Sherman's decision to essentially pioneer the concept of Total War? That a war waged against civilians as well as soldiers was seen as preferable if it brought the fighting to a close faster?
Were the tactics evolving along with the tech even at those early stages of modern warfare?
Am I tripping or was that Simon Phoenix from Demolition Man at the gatling gun?
This was a great reaction video and i love all the videos you make. If you wanted to you could react to Jeremy Clarksons video on the history of the firearm.
Hey Chris what moment in history would you change if you could that would improve history greatly
You should do his video on the war of the triple alliance!
The us civil war shows how linear warfare was a trap that could not be escaped, open order formation involving taking cover was now missing its key downside ( all this still asuming men are at around 50 meter range ) tight order however was needed to repell cavalry with bayonet lines and shapes, the best tactic in theory is to have men prett spread out with no man behind him, and when seeing cavalry run to the nearest captain
Open order with minimal care will get shredded by roundshot from artillery
Btw could someone comment on how rifled artillery worked before mass use of explosive shot, you are losing that accurate bouncing of the roundshot skimming off and close to the ground and indirect fire is even harder with a conical projectile digging into the ground rather than using large surface area to bounce
Quick note: Gewehr isn't really a name. It's just the German word for rifle.
That demolition man reference 😂
If you want another good video to react to about history of combat weaponry, lookup Dr. Ricard S Faulkner’s lecture. It will be one of the first ones that pops up on youtube. I believe its called history of small arms in combat (something along those lines, lol) Its a tad long but its very interesting.
Jesse, we need to watch more VTH videos
It’s the same with many things for example swords, take the tried and true long sword vs katana argument where whilst both swords were excellent at their jobs, the fact remains that both swords varied in terms of weight and quality even though swords or weapons needed to be mass produced like medieval cannons were extremely unreliable, be it from say poor quality cannons due to the cannon being too brittle or too soft, to the fineness and strength of the gunpowder where too little and the cannon would act more like a pee shooter more than anything else, too much and you’ve basically got yourself an improvised fragmentation bomb sitting next to you and not only that, but the quality of the cannon ball was also important since if the cannon balls were too small, then they’d simply fall out of the barrel, too big mud the cannon ball wouldn’t fit or get jammed inside of the cannon, causing the thing to explode and again considering that most countries were in a constant state of war where the demand for both weapons, powder and ammunition were in constant demand, made the job extremely dangerous and difficult, especially in powder mills where a single spark or even a static charge would be enough to cause over ten tons of gun powder to go off at once, that was even when gun powder was beginning to be mass produced where most machines and equipment were made out of wood, in order to prevent explosions and they typically operated in the countryside out of the way of any civilians or infrastructure that could get damaged or destroyed
I’m surprised you didn’t notice mr bean an 15:29
Just think the maxim machine gun was invented before the mosin nagant
And still seeing limited use - in one form or another - to this very day.
You good man? You look exhausted!
Hi Chris, absolutely love your content. I really want to see you react to a video about the battle of Brisbane.
I disagree that the minieball made linear tactics "obsolete."
machine gun and barbed wire is the deadly duo of WW1.
Myth busting: Whether during the Mexican War or the American Civil War infantrymen did not carry pistols. Sorry rebels. They were expensive, heavy, and only good at short range. A soldier would rather carry more food than 6 lbs of steel. Also, the pistol couldn't have all six cylinders loaded because the hammer had to rest on an empty chamber. The one exception was the 1858 Remington, which had a notch between each chamber that the hammer could rest on.
Chinese A: So we made this powder stuff, what should we call it and what to do with it?
Chinese B: let’s call it gunpowder and make it explode in the air and make pretty Colours!
Europe: Listen guys….. I have an idea.
This is not exactly what happened. They used fire lances and early rockets for war so they know gunpowder can be used for warfare.
It's just that they were first conquered by Mongols, and the dynasty after them (Ming) is even worse for technological development, and imported their guns from the Ottomans.
Qing works similarly to Ottomans and Russia with a system of absolute monarchy with well educated monarchs and used flintlock muskets, but fearing rebellions from Han people ruled by another race, they chose to refuse modernization.
Very cool 👍🏻
I know this is supposed to be brief history but come on he didn't even address the 1886 Lebel.
could you do fire and manouver on your gaming channel