I am from Romania. Why does he name easterm Roman Empire Romania? To establish them as descendants of romans? For our land the name was used in the 16th century, while in 19th century it was used for our country.
@@johnconstantine7442 1800 years ago the Roman empire in the Italic peninsula was decaying and the Thracian Romans gained more in influence. They gave first a famous emperor, Maximianus Thrax, who defeated the Germans for the next 100 years, then when Diocletian split the empire the first time, two or three Thracian became rulers: Galerian, Maximianus - a second one and the great Constantine. They moved a capital to their center Saruna - later Saloniki - and then built, in 320 a new capital. Contantinople. They baptized their part of the Empire with the name of “Romania” (without an â) and so it was to be called until it was conquered by Ottomans in 1453. Only in 1557, a German historian called the Empire “Byzance”, in derision, and the name was favored by many, so it stayed.
They actually didn't speak anything like the way it's been portrayed here. The account is a translation to modern English. If they spoke to you you would not be able to understand what they were saying and they would not understand what you were saying. 11th Century old English was essentially another language. You would not have recognised many words. Even how words were chained together back then is different from today.
If you are wondering where the skeletons mentioned at 6:45 came from: There was a poorly equipped and trained army under the command of Peter the Hermit and Walter the Penniless that went first the year before. They were defeated in short order by the Saracen army and the bodies were left to decay.
From what I understand, of the 600k on march, it was 100,000 soldiers and 500k regular Joes simply to assist and supply the soldiery. The logistics are mind boggling. It made me wonder...I could be wrong, but I remember hearing how prostitutes would be a part of any army on the march. Imagine thousands of camp prostitutes on the march to Jerusalem. It's good to have been born in the 20th century. I couldn't handle the stress that Steven of Blah and his friends went though. 😐
Or fighting hand to hand combat with thousands of people all swinging swords and halberds at your face. 😬 You get hit once and your as good as dead....... two weeks later from infection.
@@snickle1980 I could not imagine being a farmer or a farmers son/daughter and a whole army stretched as far Astor land in sight just sets up and say yep we’re doing this probably losing your son to glorified soldiering idea or your daughter to some charming soldier and a lot of your food taken. I wish I could have witnessed it from a bubble though.
it's like if 4th Crusade happened in WW2, Americans decided it was too risky and lots of lives would be lost while landing in D-Day so instead decided to just plunder London and surrounding areas :D
Compared to many sources we have, it's actually not that ancient, or even technically considered ancient. Think of the records the Egyptians left, THAT is ancient. We actually have over 400,000 journals, writings, letters and more from the middle ages spread about the globe. With less than 8,000 pieces of distinct literate for all of pre-roman antiquity. Huge difference.
Its incredible to me that we still have so many humans with this mental illness of “religious fervor” with this insane desire to die to “honor” their imaginary friend.
Some sources need it, though. There are often lots of ancient idioms, references, and non-standardized language that needs to be contextualized for your average audience - even after translated. Even how you translate something involves a significant amount of editorial foresight.
@@umbralobserver Not always - some events and primary sources are just complicated, and needs more detail than you would expediently or properly include in a footnote. Like, you could read tales about the Catholic inquisition of the Cathars (from the perspective of the Catholics, very few Cathar books survived the inquisition), but many experts on the topic have solid evidence to believe that the Cathars weren't a unified movement as the Catholic churches writings made them out to be. You wouldn't know that without considering archeological evidence and considering a larger body of primary sources, though. Half the shit Herodotus wrote were obviously lies, and he's one of the best surviving sources we have on antiquity. And again, even the tone and word choice itself is editing. The omission of contextual information is also an editorial choice, after all.
@@monsieurdorgat6864 You're really making more out of this than it needs to be. My original comment is more specifically about video presentations. Many people want to insert themselves into the subject and make it about themselves. This youtuber simply reads what the account says without trying to distract you with fake personality.
@@umbralobserver IDK if I've experienced many historical channels like that - but I think it's important you understand that there is no such thing as unbiased or unedited presentations. It's a big problem these days. And your comment almost seemed to be a euphemism for "I think primary sources are unbiased".
The older a story is the more fascinating it is to me. This man, his memories, every demon he had to carry from what he saw, along with all the wonders he saw for the first time. Live on, a Millennium later.
It is always interesting how the Middle Ages had a lot more connections with the ancient World than what is commonly held. Gaul, Centurions and Tribunes, terms one may not expect to find in an account of the First Crusade. While it is not impossible that these are largely just etymological remnants for a Latin writer, it is still interesting.
Every kingdom in medieval Europe (with few exceptions) fancied itself to be inheritor of Roman empire. Roman empire never died (at least not in the minds of people - including those whose forefathers destroyed it)
One should always remember that a primary source is simply recounting events, places, things and concepts using words and terms he is familiar with. He might not know how and what military ranks are actually called or organised. Imagine, for example, if during his clerical education only came across military ranks when he was reading biblical literature, originally written during and describing Roman times.
@@Demothios But at the same time, the "Art of War" of Medieval Europe was Vegetius' "De re militari", read by commanders ever since the 800s. So it is definitely probable that much more of the Medieval military was inspired by Roman practises than what people commonly give it credit for.
The monasteries in europe managed to preserve a surprising amount of roman-era texts and the age of antiquity was held in very high regard, even if the actual knowledge they had of the era was relatively spotty. A lot of rulers (especially in Italy and France) tried to imitate what they knew of Old Rome in certain aspects of life. And when people from the medieval era encountered something unknown to them, they would usually fall back on roman-era sources to try and identify what they were dealing with. So any well educated individual (like the author here, who I think was a monk?) would naturally try to use roman-era lingo to be recognized as a cultured and knowledgable person.
@@sherlocksmuuug6692 I mean, having studied Medieval philosophy, you really get a sense that the real major "Dark Age" was much shorter than what people seem to realise, when it came to the most highly educated individuals at least. The philosophers of Charlemagne's court seem no less sophisticated than many philosophers of late Antiquity, and from Charlemagne's time there is an unbroken succession of sophisticated philosophers until this very day.
I want to say thank you for taking the time to share these videos with us I've been sick for about 2 months now and they're about the only thing that's got me through it thank you keep them coming
@Roads Were Meant for Journeys - But this channel doesn't need to know how primitive French was read a thousand years ago (nor do you almost certainly either). We don't have audio records so reading Blois as in modern French is a safe choice.
"communicated from the nerves of the head to the member subject to it" Am I to understand that no only did this crusader understand the basic function of the nervous system, but could expect his readers to as well.
He is a well-educated member of the clergy. The people who could be expected to read his text would be other members of the clergy, kings, nobles. Aside from that, most of his readers would have seen, or treated those kinds of injuries. Surgeons and doctors of the time were by no means all that insightful, but even they would be able to link: "Oh, that guy only got what looked like a superficial cut right on that particular spot on the arm, and yet he cannot move his hand, anymore".
The basic function of the nervous system has been known since at least the 2nd millenia BC. Most knowledge is actually ancient, there's just a tendency to assume it's recent. And as he was reasonably well off, the author and his intended readers would have a basic understanding.
You also get a sense for how incredibly flowery and biased historical sources are. Historians usually need to read many, many sources on the same topic and compare it with archeological evidence to discern the truth - history is never reliably known through a single source. But the perspective and bias itself is enlightening to understanding what and how people thought.
@@monsieurdorgat6864 ikr, it's like the history at school only taught us abt dehumanized flat history like "oh this war happened in this year and thousands died...." and that's it. I want to know abt what the ppl thought and their accounts of those battels it rly puts into perspective what rly went down and the fact that they weren't all that different from us.
@@FriedRice3519 Honestly, these days I feel like the greatest lesson we can learn from history is that people who committed incredible atrocities were certain of their good intentions. History isn't clean, and it's always foolish to try to idolize historical figures. As an American, I just really want people to actually know what fascists look like. Way too many things happened that made me think "wow, they're actually just black-shirts, and they even tried to do the same thing!"
That's gold coins! Enough of those and you could get a water mill going back home. Set you and your family on the way to riches and maybe even respectability.
If you enjoy this and are looking for more, there are two wonderful audible titles that pull from this source and others. They tell the story of the Crusades from alternate viewpoints and through the voices of various sources recording the events for the great men of the time. Iron Men and Saints by Harold Lamb and The Flame of Islam by Harold Lamb.
So the writer makes a reference that: Franks,Italians,Germans,Bretons,English,Spaniards,Scots,Greeks and even Armenians for the first time forgot their differences and actually got along.
What’s the difference between Franks and Gauls though? Was there still people in France at that time who spoke the Frankish Germanic language unlike the rest of the population?
@@Creativethinker12 Germanic Frankish tribal identity didn't exist much past the early 7th c. For all intents and purposes, they became a bilingual people whose cultural language was Latin. There was a German language revival in the Frankish nobility when the nobility from Austrasia (the Carolingians), then a bilingual province, took power over the Frankish realm. But in Gaul the Franks were Romance speakers. In the context of the 11th c. it strictly means Northern French, aside from those living in powerful principalities of their own right (Flanders, Normandy, Brittany). The chief difference between groups was law. Law was personal, and you'd be subject to a different code depending on your ethnicity. Frankish law was used in Northern France, and as Franks had it better than Romans (or Gauls, depending on the version) in the texts, everybody there became a "Frank". Visigothic Roman law was still used in the South of Gaul, in particular Auvergne.
Yes!!!!!! I love it when your stuff comes out now I have some thing to listen to like 5 or 6 times this weeks so o can remember each part and it really sticks in my head thank you!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks so much for uploading. To me there is no better history than first hand accounts. For this reason I've kept a journal as well for 35 yrs now recording the world as I've known it. How cool it would be for someone to read it 1,000 years from today like we are hearing this although it would be no where as exciting as this man's story.
@Hanna Yachou - I hate to disappoint you, but there is nothing trivial recorded like that since it's been a far more interesting life although I admit I have no stories of cannibalism, and blood up to the ankles ;). What I do I have is a record of one persons human experience, mine, during my time on Earth at this point in history. I've recorded my successes and failures, times of sadness and times of joy, what its like to be a starving artist, and what its like to be a successful one, my experience in the military, thoughts about world events, poems, prayers, dreams, ideas, sketches ect.... Thoughts about my paintings, love, and heartbreak. Anything I want to record that I was as when I'm gone all that will remain are my manuscripts, and my paintings. You can find out more about my story here -facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.2477343539210372&type=3
It wouldn't mean much unless the apocalypse happened or something. Everything is saved on the internet and so it's archived. All of that. 100 or 200 years in the future and we are still probably going to have internet archives so...yea. you aren't really doing much
@Hanna Yachou i mean, those who study the past often treasure first hand accounts of daily life, it gives us an insight on how society used to be. I’m sure people in the future, if we even last that long with all the craziness going on, will curiously look back unto our time. Just look how popular the diary of Anne Frank is, journals from the world wars, Victorian times, the titanic, etc. It gives us a glimpse into somebody’s life, and makes us realize that despite our cultural and technological differences, at the end of the day, we’re all human
@@cthulhutentacles4994 We all think of our lives as rather mundane. Yet it always seems to be what archeologists etc are looking for. We will always have official reports of important people and events. What gets lost to history seems to be the day to day lives of normal people, the 99% of life not contained in official reports.
You're one day living peacefully, rolling on the dirt of your farm, and the next day you're sent to the Near East carrying stuff for some war against Sarracens
Imagine all the PTSD of the soldiers after a battle of watching and enforcing hand-to-hand blunt force trauma enacted on thousands and the scene and the misery etc. Rough times.
In Mexico they don't really have PTSD in their vocabulary and perceptual awareness, so people just drown their pain and move on with their lives. It's a real "get over it" culture. So I bet you can apply the same here.
PTSD is a modern thing. No one is quite sure why but it doesn't seem to have existed until very recently. There's assumptions for why, such as the higher levels of violence and mortality in the past, and the way most people were directly exposed to it in some way or another, making things like combat less "jarring" so to speak.
@@kingkoi6542 The thing about shellshock though is that it wasn't what we would refer to now as PTSD. For example treatments that would take minutes and would just consist of something like a massage would, according to the sufferer themselves, cure them of shellshock. That's not PTSD.
Sometimes I wonder how devout in their religious people of the past were, if they really believed all the religious dogma they were taught. And although it certainly varied by time, region, class, etc., one thing that can be said without a doubt is that the majority of Europeans in the late 11th and early 12th century were absolutely, entirely, wholehearted believers of the christian doctrines of the time. The crusades, the first one at least, are the proof.
Many churches those days did bemoan the shortage of devotees into the church. Plus some pagan superstitions and beliefs didn't escape the European imagination
@@teutonalex"Devout" in which they're convinced that they strongly believe, but know not what it is they believe, nor align themselves with its instructions.
Yep, the generals and soldiers with their armor, tactics and years of experience had nothing to do with the win, it was all because of Baldwin's military genious.
really cool artwork at 14:51 Mr. Kelly! idk if you do the editing or if you just provide the auditory narration but your channel kicks a lot of ass. Your brother Pete does amazing work as well. A gentlemanly tip of the hat and a smug monocle adjustment to you, sirs!
@@joellaz9836 It's amazing. Thanks so much for the info, I will now dive down the research rabbit hole on this notable Frenchman. Have a good one Joella Z :)
@@iLLeag7e I did make a mistake. The artwork at 14:51 is by another French artist called Alphonse de Neuville. However, it’s still Gustave Dorè who was the one who did lots of beautiful illustrations for the crusade.
@@joellaz9836 I was very impressed by Dore; quite the artist and his body of work is spectacular. If only i possessed a fraction of the skill! I'd beat him in a youtube comment contest though
These firsthand accounts are always fascinating, no matter the time period. Thank you for these; they’re some of my favorite videos on RU-vid. Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you friends. :)
I wonder if that's why kings put people to death or burned them? Kings used to be on the front of the line. Maybe they were jaded to death after war. And even put their own citizens to horrible deaths.
Too many people think they're the only ones who walked this earth. I don't know any other place where you can hear first-hand accounts from centuries ago. Absolutely brilliant these recountings.
The old days sound straight out of a movie. Nearly impossible to imagine something similar to these attacks happening in modern times. Imagine scaling a 3 story building using a contraption like the mobile platform shown to take it. Wild
@@CCCSaxsonWarmonger How mentality ill do you have to be to justify thousands of inocente people being slaughtered and just calling it “military action”
@@him3990 It was the custom of those time Muslim and Christian. Beside the crusader offer to spared them if they surrendered. When your enemy offered mercy and you reject it, you can't point fingers.
This account understandably downplays the cannibalism, here is the full account: "Some people said that, constrained by the lack of food, they boiled pagan adults in cooking-pots, impaled children on spits and devoured them grilled." - Radulph of Caen, wrote in his contemporaneous account Gesta Tancredi
I am a descendant of the people who came from Alsace Loraine to settle the land in Rhomania .to fight the Turks and then also continue on to the Holy land . We are called Sachs esh or Transylvanian Saxon. So this historical record was speaking of Rhomania.
I simple love the medieval paintings or drawings presented in the video , not to mention Doré's marvelous engravings , very difficult to be surpassed by any artist
Fascinating! I always find the SMALL fellows accounts to be so so different than the others. (This account is very different) many things and places were left out. ( I dont know if voices ot the past left them (editing) or the original writer was not there (wounded or sick) or just didnt think it worthy of comment (which would be strange) But the battle of Dorylaeum, this is VERY different from all the other first hand writers including the Saracen (turks) But shows how the little fellow sees a battle HIMSELF! I am a retired Marine and i have seen this so so many times. And that young Marine was not making up stories (IT IS WHAT HE SAW AND EXPERIANCED) this is really what i see as so Fascinating.. nothing really changes.. people are people. (also, it has to be noted that a tale may be told and repeated over and over (which is not true or only partly so) and it begins to be believed and folks actually repeat it like it was true and they actually saw when they did not. (this goes both ways) Just adds to my understanding (people are people ... nothing changes) What i MEAN by Small people is not to be derogatory but is a common perception (i dont like) of anyone not in a SO called leadership position. (not to say us leaders may have a bigger picture and understanding, but the enlisted fighting man in the trenches IS NO SMALL FELLOW) (I used it Facetiously)
Why do you keep saying "small fellow"? I'm not sure if you mean a short man makes the story different? Please explain. I don't understand what your point is. Littl me white the history and aren't accurate?
@@mindymorgan8479 i am saying small in the context that they are not high rank but enlisted as i said the man in the trenches who also digs the holes. i am sorry but it seemed clear to me that i was being hateful to people who say take the privates word with a grain of salt and so many so called historians do this.
In all of recorded history, the only thing that has changed is our accessories. Regardless of how sophisticated those of the past were and we are today, man's inhumanity to man continues.
I remember reading about the First Crusade in library books when I was a teenager, and sympathizing with those plucky Europeans on a grand adventure....until the massacre of Jerusalem. That was just a bummer lol.
Very curious how those corpse hooks worked, you'd think the attacker would have enough time to get the body away from the descending hooks (and that it would be very difficult to hook the corpse, presumably they were on a stiff pole because I cannot fathom being able to reliably hook a body with a chain or rope based solution)
@@MrJohnnyDistortion Yeah but how do the hooks work? Seems kinda awkward to try and dangle a hook down a wall and embed it in someone good enough to pull them up.
These are great! However, I can’t help but listen to these ancient accounts and hear similarities with modern day making me realize we as a species have not changed nor evolved as we think.
As the fruit does not fall far from the tree, so evolution is slow. Most people who are "different from both their parents" are very similar to a mix of all 4 of their grandparents.
I've spent the last few years studying ancient Greek and Roman history in detail. It's fascinating (and depressing) how the issues haven't changed... only the labels have changed.
I feel horrible for what both sides had to experience. Most of these men were very young, and some of them probably had never fought a war until this point. Many left the war with physical scars, but all left with mental scars.
My fav is the story of the "Sea Peoples" by the Egyptians and others of the time. Quite a mystery. "No one knows who they were...or what they were doing...but their legacy remains."
Right... The sad part is that the Roman Catholic Church thought all of the slaughter pillage and destruction was justified because someone else had a different imaginary friend...... god is a cunt.
Lmao which acts? The Church founded by Christ cannot, has not, and will not sully His name. No true follower of Christ intended for all of these atrocities, even if they claimed to be one.
The Crusaders really were a bunch of bumblers who didn't know what they were doing. My impression is that the committed to military operations in another part of the world without actually bothering to research it.
You know nothing about history then , the Crusaders knew exactly where Jerusalem was, it was a Christian city for about 400 years plus before a muslim army turned up and took , the Crusade's were born out of 300 years of Christians being attacked murdered raped and taxed = jizya , out of their lands eg almost all of middle East north Africa Spain and Asia minor, the Pope got the waring Franks to help stop the invasion of Christian lands , and open up Jerusalem to Christians again who wanted to travel to where Christ gave his life for our sins , you say look up where they were going , where the internet, the local library, Google it , Google maps , your comment speaks for its self
these videos are the coolest shit ever. i love first hand sources, because its real, its often very different than any hollywood portrayal. it is true reality thanks bro
I watched the whole thing. What a hellish experience war is. I don't know how they could've justified themselves in committing such atrocities. It's bad enough to be the aggressor in war, but slaughtering women, children, and babies?? The whole city ankle-deep in their blood?? And then BOASTING about it??? What monsters.
That was literally the norm for medieval and ancient combat, and the knee thing is a myth. there would be needed hundreds of gallons of blood to fill such a big place, and humans don't bleed that fast.
The crusaders weren't really the aggressors though, at least in the beginning. But a large part of the crusaders (excluding the noblemen) were already murderers, rapists etc. that went on the crusade because the priests promised them forgiveness for their sins and a place in heaven if they partook in the crusade.
I still remember the introduction of a documentary on the crusades hosted by the late Terry Jones of Monty Python, as only he could...It began with the words: "This is the town of Ma'arat al-Numan in Syria, and, in midwinter of the year 1098, it was invaded...by Cannibals!..."😁 That, as it turned out, was exactly what happened.
This video's account understandably downplays the cannibalism, here is the full account: "Some people said that, constrained by the lack of food, they boiled pagan adults in cooking-pots, impaled children on spits and devoured them grilled." - Radulph of Caen, wrote in his contemporaneous account Gesta Tancredi
@@user-zq1nz7qv7o It's like they say about prison. Everyone is a cannibal under the right circumstances. And that reinforces for me the point that you should never get your history from a comedian. Everything has to be funny, even at the expense of the truth. And over time, the laughter dies away and all that's left are the holes where the truth used to be.
@@user-zq1nz7qv7o "Some people said" doesn't sound like a full account to me. Sounds like someone playing a story up to be more extreme. I don't doubt there was cannibalism but I can't abide the often wild guesstimations of troop numbers common at the time, and vague phrases such as "some people said" or "people are saying" immediately send up red flags.
It is very funny seeing Christians having to invent entirely new verses to justify their brutality against the direct scolding of their pacifistic Messiah who said blessed be the meek and give your left cheek to those who slap your right
It's actually really great that the Crusades took place. The Renaissance would have either not taken place or been severely delayed if the Crusades had not have happened. It also helped delay and push back Islamic expansion, giving Europe enough time to advance to eventually outshine and surpass the Middle East.
@@My-Name-Isnt-Important if the Muslims weren't occupied with the crusades, they might've been able to defend against the mongols, and the library of Bagdad would have stayed intact
Through todays modern lens yeah sure it would be. Hell child labor laws werent inacted until the 1930s, look at that through the eyes of oversheltering parents that wont even let their kids play outside nowdays
I like how even though the crusading army was incredibly diverse (having people from essentially everywhere in Europe) they still treated each other like brothers
Malbork is indeed "a Polish man's home." Between 1457 and 1772 Malbork served as Polish royal residence. In 1772 castle was annexed by Prussia during first partition of Poland. Prussian devastated the castle during their reign. In 1945 castle was vastly destroyed as a result of Soviet offensive.After WW 2 the castle was rebuilt from ashes by the Republic of Poland.
@@HerrRelke it began as the headquarters of the Teutonic order. The Germans built it, the Poles comondeered it for some time and the Prussians took it back.
@@raymatter7793 Teutonic Order was defeated in several wars against Kingdom of Poland and Grand Dutchy of Lithuania. Malbork was taken in 1457 by the Polish forces and castle served as a residence of Polish kings. What you called: "some time" is actually about 400 years (which include total reconstruction after WWII).
interesting how the writer claims these huge numbers of soldiers, there's no way the turks could muster 360,000 or that 6 million people marched through Italy before retreating
Your times are as good as long you experience bad things to compare. Otherwise we get the boredom, nihilist life many Western people have now. Humans never evolved to be happy, look at the levels of depression in the Rich west. They need some unhappiness to feel complete.
So awful, those times. I mean people might comment that not much has changed, but I disagree. A lot has changed in most people's attitudes toward violence, and even standards during war, and criminal punishment.
This is such an interesting account, it makes the history feel incredibly real. What strikes me is the deep pity and emotion with which he describes people killed by the 'Turks' and yet so dispassionately and approvingly he describes the slaughter of whole cities, almost certainly including women and children.
It’s fascinating to hear how much of a rabble the crusading armies really were. This author himself testifies to the fact that his large group were completely lost and starving in Anatolia, with barely enough water. Then they show up at Antioch and the city had already been taken by the more organized European Princes’ armies. Then they were allowed to eat and drink for 4 months before continuing on together. Really fascinating!
@@crappymeal HAD they been able to hold the city over the centuries, I'd say it wouldn't have been a waste...A nice area of hegemony in the middle east for the holy roman empire. That was a HARD city to take and keep and it changed hands many times...so yeah. perhaps a bit of a waste...but had the crusades not occurred, i wonder how far Islam would have reached across western Europe. 😐
@@snickle1980 they wouldn't have been able to hold it for centuries and even if they did evey aspect of their culture like all others would be gone, nothing last forever so why worry about culture, borders, bloodlines, religion or anything? waste of time in the grand scheme. everything man has ever waged war for is gone and forgotten, waste of life and nothing worth dieing for.
@@crappymeal I believe there are some wars that need to be fought and some causes are worth dying for. Humanity simply isn't great at working out our differences, eh? But As long as humanity itself endures, I'll be content. True. life is change. Constant change. It's water more than it is stone... The passing of cultures and belief systems, governing bodies, and laws within ones own LIFETIME is jarring enough after you've lived a few decades. "The dead know only one thing. It is far better to be alive." PS: If you ever feel like a game of chess on Lichess, send me a message. My name there is TheSnickle. 😀
@@snickle1980 thanks for the invite but i don't play, my view is that the only reason wars even happen in the first place is because of people who believe the stuff i listed matters, if they knew how futile it was to protect they wouldn't care as much about it or want to push it on others
Dwight D. Eisenhower would have had a heart attack by the lack of logistics and planning of the crusades. The crusaders should have first transformed the island of Cyprus into a huge base. Loaded it to the brim with supplies and men. Spend months training recruits for battle. And proper battle strategy would have meant to first invade Egypt and take out the Fatimid caliphate. Then push north into the Levant. Before doing this however a diversionary force would need to be activated in Anatolia to distract the Seljuk Turks while the real offensive was taking place in Egypt. All the while there would be a steady stream of supplies and reinforcements coming from Cyprus. But, the reason why the crusades were ultimately a failure was because they didn’t take out the Fatimid caliphate at the beginning.
Yeah it blows my mind how big of a logistical nightmare the crusades were and how it could have gone much differently w better planning. But I get that it was in some ways unprecedented.
However %100 true, these were peaceful Catholics that literally didn't have a choice BUT to decimate the Turkish slavers, whom had been ravaging peaceful Christians for the 150 years prior to the crusades...
Richard the Lionheart did capture Cyprus during the 3rd Crusade and did use seaborne supplies to great effect during his campaigns. As for the rest, you are pretty much describing the goal of every Crusade after the 3rd one: First take Egypt, before moving north into the Levant again.
Great narrative, as always. I definitely enjoy these stories and feel like I travel back in time, hearing them. This time I noticed one possible mistake, caused probably by the translation from the original version. You mention few times the country of ROMANIA, but in 1095 it didn’t exist. Romania appeared over 3 centuries later. Is it possible that the author is referring to RUMELIA, instead? RUMELIA, was the territory around Constantinople, on the European side of actual Turkey.
@@georgethoms2806 "Is it possible that the author is referring to RUMELIA, instead?" It is Literally the same place. Yes, it *is* about Romania. Depending on where one was from, they (at that time) used the word "Romania" when discussing that place. Take the information offered to you, and move on. Master your impulse to argue and correct, you'll be a better person for it.
@@vivienj9072 The information is crap . Do us a favor and do not spread it … or even worse to insist that other people swallow it. Your ignorance is surpassed only by your arrogance.
Lovely channel. It’s so reverent and quite beautiful if I’m allowed to say. The soundtrack is always particularly good and so well focused to compliment what is being seen or heard throughout a given video or chapter/episode. This episode is particularly good and had me heartfelt connected to this person’s harrowing ordeal and absolute piety. The notion of so many seeing no reason to go off and die and making up face saving spins to allow them to not get guys kids killed. Called cowardly, perhaps rightly so, who am I to say, still.. it’s good to see that there for better or worse, will always be the guy or guys who ask, “Wait…. You want me…. You want my whole hamlet…. You are asking us to March how far and to face countless dedicated “heathens” on their very hot turf with little water and how many are going to be there? They also like to decap-i-what now?” The bishop responds assuredly, “Yes. That’s right. Shall we pack your things. Bring the sheep and dogs btw. (Mumbles) gonna need to not bring so much shit. Sheep can’t carry fuck all.” “What was that?” “Nothing. Crusades! Who says? What do you say now? Are you ready to get going?” Blinks. Blinks two more times “Hey um, listen…. The town and I have decided we are going to stay back and make sure that there are not any Viking raids where our wives and kids are just doing their things g currently. Good luck with that whole thing in the land of milk and honey. Tell us all about it when your head is making its way home on the back of ole’ Buster the dog.” The end. Bow Bow
The barbarism that humans are capable is so scary. People say we WERE barbaric but we still ARE. Sometimes I understand these people that just give up everything and move off grid.
That's just one of many reasons ,some of us saw through the Main Act when for one reason or another witnessed the truth from behind the curtain .pawns,bishops,knights, kings and queens . Smoke and mirrors .
