The Most Powerful Weapon Of Every Century | History Teacher Reacts

Dr. Explained @drexplained0 discusses the more powerful weapon of each century. What do you think of the list? Mr. Terry discusses.

Join my channel to get early-access to new videos!

Links:

[wqert]

Normally I check out the original video but... man this one felt like it was written by AI. Or written to specifically farm engagement via corrections or people being angry at it.
Also seems solely focused on Europe rather than stuff from other parts of the world, and also just skips a few thousand years of history as well? Sure there might be less clear records from earlier centuries, but they could easily do like... 8th-4th century BCE or something like that.
This is one I'd pass on if it wasn't for Mr. Terry's commentary.

[savvas]

Disclaimer, the ranking you reacted to was made by an AI, the person who posted the video even states that in the comment section. Which is why you might see some strange choices in this list.

[voidcadet]

About the Pilum:
According to Peter Connolly's book "Greece and Rome at War, " some versions of the pilum were weighted by a lead ball to increase penetrative power.
However, these've only been seen in paintings and wall carvings, and no actual examples have been found at archaeology sites (so far).

[Shoomer]

I would argue that maybe some more of the naval technology could have made it onto the list. The 'Ship of the Line' was a game changer and in modern times an Aircraft Carrier is a hell of a lot more useful than a nuke.

[alexjahblunt]

Some of these I disagree with so much 😂😂 like how is a battering ram the most powerful weapon in the 11th century ?? They’ve been used for ever

[MichaelHall]

Answer for your first question: the ball on the pilum serves a couple of purposes. First, it puts weight directly behind the part of the weapon that you want to stick in the enemy. Second, since the metal end of the weapon is going to naturally bend a bit on impact, the weight behind it is going to want to keep moving forward (because physics) which will cause the end to either bend permanently or break.

Think about this: if you put a bowling ball on the end of a pool cue and dropped it from a window, when the tip of the cue hits the ground, the bowling ball is going to want to keep going straight down. It will end up having to veer off one way or the other, but not before breaking the cue. It's also going to make the tip of the cue hit with a LOT more force.

[KarmasAB]

"The Most Powerful Weapon of Every Century"

Just have the spear for like 95k years

[MalikF]

Pretty sure longbow was being used in 1300s it was used by Scotts and English.

[Grognard-nepf]

Not sure it's the right niche but if anyone's heavily interested in military history and weaponry in diachronic and comparative perspective I strongly recommend Schwerpunkt's content. Lesser know channel but a veritable hidden gem Art of War wise

[fuseblower]

There's the famous siege tower with battering ram in the 1st century, during the siege of Masada. A mini series with Peter O'Toole has been made about that historical battle between the Jews and the Romans. Was an impressive moment when the siege tower (which had been made in secret) was rolled out and pulled up the constructed hill to reach the fortress.

[LCCWPresents]

Seige warfare is mostly about starving out the enemy, the weapons change, but the tactics don’t.

[zaqzilla]

I have two critiques. The long bow wasn't inherently more powerful than short bows. However a long bow is easier to make than a short bow of equal poundage. As far as the 20th and 21st century go. I go with Bombers for the 20th and Drones for the 21. Not only were the only two nukes used in war delivered by bomber, but far more death and destruction as been caused by conventional bombs dropped from bombers than both nukes. Thou still early in the 20th century, drones are becoming more and more prevalent and lethal on the battlefield.

[zacharymetcalf]

Skipped over tanks, AirCrafts, rifling, TNT, the modern pointed tip bullet. I mean trully so much that could of been mentioned that seems minor but really was a big deal. Even clothing going from Colored reds whites greens and all sorts of European styles of uniforms to the modern draws to help blend into the terrain.

[ralphvelthuis]

Anyone else notice he's playing the music from the SS marching song Erica in the background as he's narrating?

[madogthefirst]

The Scorpion/Balista have also been known to throw large rocks.

[ozzybloke-craig]

The Honjo Masamune was the greatest Blade ever forged. I put a video on your discord about it with an explanation of it, I really hope you react to it soon. It is such a good story it has and it might be out there and found one day in America, not in Japan.

[timnewman]

I'd say the 15th century was past the heyday of the longbow. It had dominated English wars with France and Scotland in the 14th (and I'd be happy to put it in there) but by the 15th century we English had almost made it into a fetish which *had* to be used in the traditional manner as that was the way to win battles. As was proved by the French and Swiss, it was no longer a battle-winning weapon/tactic.

I also wish he'd been a little less Euro-centric and not included both siege and naval warfare, and made the focus on land battles.

So where I'd go would be:
1st century - composite bow in the hands of a guy on a horse
2nd-12th century - still the same
13th century - no change yet, although crossbows are a real problem for the pony boys
14th century - Longbow
15th century - early cannon
16th century - pike, more than the aruebus, the cannon or the cavalry, the clash of pikes was what won land battles (I know he includes sea battles so maybe there's a better case for both cannon and arquebus due to that).
17th century - wheellock pistol - a feature of battles in that century is that infantry fights were rarely decisive or quick, and winning the cavalry engagement so you could launch flank attacks on engaged infantry was a very important way to win battles. And And the key cavalry weapon was the pistol.
18th century - musket. This is the century of the musket duel, of infantry being the most decisive arm, with few exceptions until very late in the century when massed cannon start to be a key component of tactics.
19th centurry - artillery. From Napoleon's Grand Batteries and their counterparts in other armies to the rifled breech-loaders of the late century (both on land and sea), Concentrate your guns, batter down the enemy artillery, and it's very easy to break through the lines of infantry you bombard. Until the 1880s when armies start to issue spades.
20th century - air power. Nuclear weapons aren't much use if you have to deliver them by hand (or even artillery piece) and air power has in reality been used far mor often to great effect.


Siege warfare
1st-14th century - disease and famine
15th century onwards - cannon

[MrAGNTJ]

in a way i can understand why the Longbow was the most powerful weapon of the 15th century, yea it required a lot more training then a crossbow, but the point was you arent loosing those experienced long bowmen because wile the knights are fighting an army, on the other side of the forest to your right theres the longbowmen shooting in the general direction of the enemy, too far away for the enemy to even know they are there, wich means wile their crossbow men are in full view of your cavalry, your longbowmen are practically outside of the battle just providing support, the equivalent of having bomber support in modern warfare basically

i think the reason he doesnt even consider Cannons its because they werent used that much, EVEN for sieges, like to be fair Cannons were heavy, and can only shoot in one direction, they were most likely the equivalent of a Ballista, so i can imagine compared to those other weapons the Cannon just isnt as impressive as when you put it alongside other battles it falls short, for example in an open field battle the cannon is mostly a nuisance, taking out only a line of enemies when fired and since it most likely took a wile tor reload and fire, in most battles they were rather useless as they could be taken cared of by ranged units, and cavalry, historically speaking cavalry often dealt with cannons quite easily and with ranged weapons i mean you technically just have to deal with the men manning those cannons, so i can understand why cannons werent considered that powerfull, specaily when pinned against other weapons that had greater range like the trebuchet or as the guy mentioned the longbow, it was only after a more automatic way of reloating was invented that cannons had a greater chance against enemies, and with the invention of the musket, greater defence, plus with greater range the cannon practically turned into the artillery so it took a wile for cannons to become reliable really

[jdotoz]

"Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim Gun, and they have not."

[joesisler]

I feel like Missles as a whole would be better than specifically nukes. Nukes are strong, but have very little actual deaths tied go them compared to other weapons.