This is a serious and grim topic but that Extra Credits reference was still funny. My favorite bit of knowledge in this episode was that about Rashi's daughters.
@@yko_7313 About 8:52; "But why let the very Church you claim to be fighting for get in the way of a good crusade?". The "why let _____ get in the way of a good crusade?" was a running joke in the Extra History series about the first crusade. I think they also referenced it in some other videos.
While the growth of the Western European _Rishonim_ is often attributed to Rashi, the roots of that growth - Rashi's teachers, and their teachers - cannot be omitted. Specifically, _Rabbeinu_ Gershom _Me'or Hagolah,_ (died c. 1040) as the spiritual and academic grandfather of Ashkenazi Jewry, and the founder of the Rhineland _yeshivos_ that were not under the authority of the _Geonim_ in Baghdad.
I appreciate that you acknowledged that the Catholic Church made various efforts to protect Jews. However, it’s not true that Urban II offered absolution to people who participated in the First Crusade. He granted them a “plenary indulgence” for sins that had already been absolved or forgiven, meaning that the crusade itself would serve as their penance. No one to my knowledge was promised by any Pope that their sins would be forgiven if they joined a crusade.
“yes yes thank you for slaughtering my countrymen and desecrating the institutions of my people’s faith. This is exactly what I would have wanted.” - Jesus, probably
@@SamAronow To think that these self-identifying catholics would view their crimes as comparable to the freedom fighting they read about in the Book(s) of Maccabees....just turns my stomach. Too few know about such history, you say what needs to be said about the past.
@@scottwarthin1528 guess that's what happens when you take thousands of religious fanatics (who can't even read their own scripture) and feed them up with nonesense and lies - thou one could have expected that basic human sense of morality would still have prevented such thing from happening.
"Rashi script" isn't actually Rashi's personal handwriting. The script was commonly used by the Jews of southern Europe during the early renaissance. Since it was such a common script, it was set to type in one of the earliest Hebrew printed book, Rashi's commentary on the Pentateuch, and it continues to be used in hebrew printing up to the present day.
Actually this script is the Sepharadic hebrew script, and was widely used until very recently by most of the Sepharadic communities. Much like the modern hebrew script is the Ashkenazi script. Since the first hebrew printing press began in Italy, which was under Sepharadic influence both the block letters and the script contain distinct Sepharadic style (even the block letters differ from traditional Ashkenazi tradition of that time)
Its partially correct...rashi script is called that because the first printing of rashis manuscripts took place in Italy by sefardic Jews who used the fonts that they all commonly used and wrote with.
As the op I'm gonna point out that everyone in this thread is in agreement. I'm not sure why either of you thinks you're arguing with me or each other. In case either of you were unaware southern Europe includes Spain and Italy.
@@isserles cuz u missed one very important point.... it makes no difference to most whether it's from south or north Europe... but theres a great significance whether it originated from Sephardic or Ashkenazi Jews
2:18 Man, that is a bit surprising. I am not used to seeing Charlemagne depicted like that. Most modern depictions of him comes from paintings made the 19th century that usually depict Charlemagne with long flowing hair and a Moses-like beard(because romanticism). I'm glad you picked a more historically accurate depiction, although it needs a little getting used to.
I remember reading the Mainz anonymous account of the crusade there in 1096 in my medieval Jewish history class. The account of what happened there was so grueling and haunting. I remember one passage where a Jewish mother was killing her own children to spare them from the brutality of the crusaders. One of her children hid because they didn’t want to die but she dragged him out and killed him so that he would not die at the hands of the crusaders in a more brutal way. It still haunts me thinking about it.
A few months ago, I picked up an anthology of Jewish accounts of the crusades from my Yeshiva's library to learn more about that era. I could barely get through two accounts before I had to put the book down. It was just too hard to read.
Yep. And something I remember from my own Jewish History courses that Sam didn't mention is that these Crusaders really liked burning Jews because it meant destroying records of the loans they needed to pay to Jews
I doubt she killed him because of the brutality....its definitely a possibility...but its known that the Christian's would take the baby's and try to convert them and raise them as christians... and Jews throughout history gave up they're lives rather then leave the Gd of Abraham Isaac and Jacob
I had written an (informal) paper about Frankish society in the Crusade States, and many of my sources contrasted the violent periods of crusader activity to the generally tolerant rule (compared to other Christian kingdoms) by the Frankish elites as a means of securing control with their limited manpower. In "The World of the Crusades: a Daily Life Encyclopedia," Andrew Holt claims in particular claimed that the city of Acre, when it was the capital of the Kingdom after Jerusalem fell, the Jewish community there was the foremost in influence in the Eastern Mediterranean. What the source didn't do was discuss if that prominence was a result of Frankish policy or if it was in spite of it. Have you crossed any information like that through your research, and if so, would be able to elaborate? Thank you!
I will cover this in a future video, but suffice it to say that the Jewish population in Acre wasn't very large or influential until Yehiel of Paris arrived there in 1258, and the Kingdom of Jerusalem fell for good only 32 years later. If you want to see a more clear contrast between Crusading and domestic tolerance, look into the Normans and their various realms in Europe.
I’d just like to add to the ever-expanding wall of praise for your content. I’m thankful your videos started popping up on my recommended list! Keep up the great work, I love hearing this perspective of history!
Hey Sam Aronow, dumb suggestion but could you ever make a video on what the armies of Judea looked like. I know you've moved past that time period but just a suggestion.
Judea wasn't really big or powerful enough to get a distinct military look. They would have resembled the army of whomever was the dominant power in the region at the time.
Another really great episode filling in some gaps in my knowledge and understanding of our history! If I might make one helpful suggestion, perhaps generally, but specifically to the content of this episode and it's relationship to past ones. I think it would have been helpful to delineate the course of the Rhine river on the maps of the cities and towns with communities effected by this crusade. Especially in light of your previous video that talked about the initial roots of the Ashkenazi community being of and descended from the Judaean slaves brought to the Rhine valley by Titus, his army, and those who came with them. Water is such a crucial organizer of human society and it seems that in the case of this crusade, the crusaders essentially just followed the Rhine, killings their way down river as they went. Thanks again for your good work!
Estimates vary wildly, but based on figures a century later that are relevant to the next episode, about 1 in 5 of Jews were in Europe in the 12th century, split about evenly between Spain, Italy, the Balkans, and the rest of the continent (for which read France, the HRE, and England). From this we can assume that the First Crusade tipped the population balance slightly more towards Europe, but it wasn't until the 17th century when the majority of Jews were living in Europe, in part due to the Little Ice Age desertifying Asia and Africa as well as a multi-century baby boom in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
An interesting additional note: In the Middle Ages the best place to be Jewish was Moorish (Muslim) Spain. After that, the worst place to be Jewish was in Christian Spain. When people talk about the violence of Islam I never forget that.
@@koshersalaami No, the best place to be a Jew then was in Provence. And you wouldn't have loved the Islamic rule in Spain during its entire reign. The so called 'Golden Age' is exaggerated. And when it even ended Jews & Christians were marching arm in arm in Toledo protesting their persecution by Muslims. And of course, Maimonides fled the 'tolerant' Muslim rule in Spain for more tolerant Muslim rule in Egypt. Fact is, there was plenty of massacres and persecution of Jews under both Christian & Islamic rule. Yes, it was on a far greater scale under Christianity. But there were tolerant places for Jews to live under both Christianity & Islam, at times. In Provence, for a long time.
Will you ever do a video about the Ethiopian jews or the kifang (i dont know how to spell it) jews there, as well as the Indian jews, are such a interesting part of Jewish history
Can you please NOT stop making these videos. You don't understand your'e keeping me alive ... it means so much 😳 This is not a trolling comment or sarcasm in any way and believe it or not there is an increasing number of modern orthodox and Masorti congregant Jewish people that could attest to this. I mean everything about the videos your'e producing. You're making me not want to act like obnoxious trolling jerkoff. This keeps on coursing adrenaline in me. It makes me want to help people that when they both want and need the help as well as leaving people alone that wish to be left alone. To be happy with I have and accomplish not what I want . The soundtrack and production is amazing. It is as good or better than the animated documentary about Maimonoades narrated by actor Leonard Nimoy. It is because of this that I may very well have the "theological drive" so to speak to become a Barmitzvah even though I'm a grown ass man in my mid 40's. Thanx man, thanks 🔯🛐🔧🔨🔩
Thank you for this so very sad story. As a historian, I really believe that is vital to study and know history, even the very worst, to hopefully prevent future reoccurrences. I watched a couple of the Google ads, I understand your concerns. I faced similar issues when I was posting videos of the library I worked at a decade ago.
A presentation that at first was great but then your underlying bigoted and unbalanced attitude to Catholics and Catholicism spoilt the presentation and distorted your interpretation. I did not see the same attitude towards Islam and Muslims. It seems at the moment there is a growing anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism by the secular world and this seemed like further Catholic bashing to me. History and its interpretation is much more nuanced than what you presented here.
How is it Catholic bashing, can you refer to the time stamp of him being bigoted?Also it might seem to be unbalanced to your perspective because he is pointing out a horrible crime committed and organized by said Church. I also don’t understand your comment on why he didn’t have the same attitude with Islam, this is about the Crusades an offensive launched by Christians against Muslims and Jews, Muslims suffered terribly at the hands of crusaders. Overall your statement would like to change history so it would fit your narrative you have of Catholicism.
its often been thought that the crusades were all about attacking muslims , but there was all so anti pagan crusades as well as anti Jewish killings and what happened to the cathars is all so close
@MitchTheYoshi yes there were many , all done by other christians or other monotheists against other christians or monotheists . MONOTHEISM IS A CURSE ON HUMANITY
The patriarch of Constantinople didn't actually excommunicate the pope, but the diplomat he'd sent. And it wasn't the pope himself who excommunicated the patriarch, but the diplomat he'd sent.
True, the Patriarch of Constantinople didn’t attempt to excommunicate his superior, but he did remove him from the diptychs. And the Patriarch was excommunicated by the Pope, but it was his legate who communicated his decree to the Patriarch
50,000 sounds like a pretty high number for Jews in Eretz Israel immediately before the crusades because I was under the impression that there wasn’t such a large population there at the time which would lead Jews to be making up a major percentage of the population
You said Rashi's Biblical commentary is a commentary on the Aramaic Translation (Targum Onkelos)? I have never heard this, and, as someone who has studied nearly the entire commentary, it does not strike me as correct. While Rashi does often make use of Targum Onkelos, his commentary is clearly based on the Hebrew Biblical text. As far as I know, the bit about Rashi script being based on his handwriting is urban myth. It is simply a different typeface chosen by the printers in the 1500s to distinguish the commentary from the Biblical/Talmudic text on the page. The notion that the Tosafot "completed" the Talmud text is misleading. Their project was reconciling disparate texts across the Talmudic corpus, but there was already a complete Talmudic corpus for 500+ years. Perhaps you mean to say that the Tosafot are the last major item found on the modern printed page of the Talmud. This is true, but, again, only relevant to the modern printing. Thanks for another great video!
The standard version of the Humash Rashi is indeed on the Targum Onkelos, but in the interest of historical linguistics he frequently cross-references the Hebrew text to determine meanings.
@@SamAronow The title of this piece is "מעמדו של תרגום אונקלוס בתודעתו הפרשנית של רש"י" Nowhere do the authors suggest that Rashi's commentary is "on" Targum Onkelos ie that the Targum is the primary work that he is glossing, rather the authors are investigating Rashi's use of Onkelos as a source in his commentary on the Pentateuch. From the abstract: "The author compares the place of Targum Onkelos in Rashi's exegesis with that of other sources he used, and examines specific items from his commentary to the Bible and the Talmud." Cheers!
@@benjaminromm8184 I'm pretty sure Sam has it wrong. But then he knows about Rashi from history books and papers rather than from studying it from the age of 7.
You made this video right in time for my history paper on this exact subject! thanks! so good, ill watch more. So theres this (second event) and the holocaust (fourth event) what was the first and third event?
Loved the frenetic summary of the run-up to the crusade. I hope you don't mind I had a couple of thoughts: The Buyids were a Turkic dynasty ruling over Persian territory, I have not seen Rum equated with Muslim before, it was the name given to Asia Minor derived from Rome as the Byzantines saw themselves as Romans, there were also two other Apostolic Sees in Jerusalem and Alexandria but as they and Antioch were under Muslim rule the rift between Eastern and Western Churches was over which if either of the two remaining had primacy. For the first millennium Rome claimed primacy but without much success, I think it makes sense to view the crusade as an attempt to solidify the primacy of Rome within northern Europe, if people answered the call to take up the cross they acknowledged that the Pope had the authority he claimed. Looking forward to the next episode.
I notice that, also. 3? I thought there were the 5: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem...at least way back before the crusades in Emperor Justinian's time
@@scottwarthin1528 They were the first five but even then didn't have the kind of authority over believers that Rome would later claim. For the first millennium Rome had nowhere as much authority over Europe, in part because of poorer transport and communication for much of that time, and its' authority after has been exaggerated by many historians.
Buyids were Daylamites hence Persian not Turkic. They were a Shia Dynasty ruled the Persia and parts of modern day Iraq before the Seljuks arrived. And while Rum is indeed refers the Roman lands and Byzantium, after the Seljuk conquest of Anatolia, the branch of Seljuks who ruled Anatolia and seperated from Great Seljuks named by choronologists as Rum Sultanate. It is historical naming.
Wait a minute... that ending... Is it Salahadin time already? (I don't know how to spell his name in english, I probably butchered it...) Damn, this went by quickly. Your videos keep getting better and better!
@@andrewpitts-nordera1841 Thanks! I know that in English it was shortened into "Saladin" but I was trying to be more accurate... All I remembered though was that in Hebrew it's "צלאח א-דין" (Tsalakh A-Din) so I tried to work off of that.
I hate Jewish history. It's always so sad. Are you familiar with the British genealogy TV show "Who Do You Think You Are"? It's been running for about 20 years, and US TV bought the rights and produced their own show for over a decade now, I think. Well, in Israel, the IBA (the forerunner of todays "Kan" broadcasting corporation) also bought the rights, but only ever produced one season. Every story ended up more or less the same way, in massacre and expulsion and prosecution and holocaust. It was so depressing, they figured it's better to leave well enough alone...
They did, so that’s a historical fact. The pushback should be on the poorly implied (hinted at) suggestion that 109x can’t be wrong and that the explosions were justified.
The 1054 mutual excommunication thing between Pope Leo IX and Patriarch Michael I Kerolarios is no longer consider historical. The Papal Legate, Humberto de Silva personally excommunicated Patriarch Michael I while the Patriarch in kind excommunicated ONLY THE LEGATE, not the Pope. By then, Leo IX had died fighting the Normans when the excommunication happened which places into question the power of Humberto as legate to excommunicate anyone. Anyways no. Old men bishops bashing each other did not affect the relationships of ordinary Christians between the Latin and Greek cultures and they simply slowly drifted apart due to cultural differences, theology and politics like the Massacre of the Latins in 1162 and the Sack of Constantinople by the Frankish crusaders in 1204. When the relics of St. Nicholas of Myra was carried away by Italians in fear that the Muslim Seljukid Turks would desecrate Myra, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Bari welcomed the relics and commemorated in the Dipythach both the Pope and Patriarch in 1089? CE, which was AFTER 1054
Man, I stumbled upon your channel the other day and I really enjoy it but you should be more careful when presenting your favorite theories and/or traditions as facts. As an examlple, although I personally sympathize with the roman-ashkenazi tradition, I'd never present it as a fact, and the radanites' ashkenazi origins one is so disputed there are even theories stating both radanites originated from or gave birth to the ashkenazi. There are traditions that simply lack both historical and archaeological evidence to be proven (or disproven) as facts. It's just 3 minutes into the video and you could easily have solved this by saying 'altough disputed, one of the ashkenazi origins theory' or something like that. I know it's kind of boring to do it, but it's important to distinct theory from consensus (or even fact from fiction, sometimes or more crudely) in historiography, specially nowadays, with the proliferation of social media and fake news.
It is a tragic recount, like many others going back thousands of years, by many peoples. However we should all take a moment, a breath and realize.... This is THEIR war, not OURS. We can live in the present and go forward intending no future sins... However if we continue to be enraged by people in a different reality, long since dissolved to dust in their graves, then such graves await us too.
Hey I know this is a bit older video, but if anyone knows, please may I have an academic source on the claim that Alexios promised to recognize pope as the head of the holy church the mentions at 6:47? I can't find any and the sources listed in the description are very scarce and general and overall unusable for my thesis. Thank you!
Forgive my for misremembering when I wrote the script: this seems to have been Urban's own inference, and it makes sense, but I don't know that Alexios actually explicitly promised it.
@@SamAronow Thanks for a quick reply, I found a ton of stuff on how have defended orthodoxy throughout his reign so had this promise been solid argument it would have made for a few very interesting points :D too bad.
What the more crazy and idiotic crusaders either forgot or failed to realize was that taking up the cross allowed for remission of sins you had committed BEFORE you joined the Crusade, anything you did after that point in time was still considered a sin on you. Same thing with paid indulgences during the late middle ages/early modern they were the sins of those who had been forgiven before death but still needed to do their time in purgatory before entering heaven proper. It was NOT a get out of Hell Free card but unfortunately many still considered them so and would do some heinous things after paying for one.
When absolution was offered with no behavior change required, those who needed it but wouldn’t change to get it, were the ones that “responded”. Combine that with no organization and disaster was inevitable. Never advertise for violent people without a thorough plan for organization & control. Tragedy will occur otherwise.
Why did you depict Iftikhar al-Dawla black?!! It seems that's there's only reference to him being from the quarter of the Egyptians! If this some woke thing to wash history for diversity and inclusevity sake, then as Middle Eastern man, I AM OFFENDED!
At the time Bar Hebraeus described him, "from the quarter of the Egyptians" was a euphemism/misused term for a Sudanese or Somali person, much in the same manner as "American Indian."
@@SamAronow well it's not definite! Could you give some sources? Is there other chroniclers that reference him or other reference to the "euphemism", I would assume that the text by Bar-Hebraeus was written i Arabic or Syriac?
In his guide to the first crusade, British historian David Nicolle makes note of the euphemism. The only other people Bar Hebraeus would refer to as "of the quarter of the Egyptians" were Christians, which Iftikhar definitely wasn't. Combining this with the fact that his name indicates he was Shi'a (which, despite being the Fatimid religion, was quite rare among the public in Egypt), he theorizes that Iftikhar had first come into Fatimid service as part of the elite Sudanese infantry imported as slaves by the Vizier Badr al-Jamali. pdfcoffee.com/c132-pdf-free.html
@@aa-zz6328 There is no reason to be offended, and unless you have better evidence for an alternative ethnicity for Iftikhar, you should calm yourself.
You can probably blame Nasser for that. While obviously never sympathetic to the idea of a Jewish state, he didn't initially differentiate it from just another Middle Eastern nationalist movement. But after the Suez Crisis, he completely turned around and started publishing The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in Arabic.
This representation of the 1st crusade and the "connection" with the people's crusade and the Rheinland massacres makes me seriously doubt anything I saw on this channel I have had no prior knowledge of.
@Sam Aronow Just found your channel. Really enjoying it. Quick question: at around 11:04 of the video, you said that the Rhineland Massacres are considered the second of four Jewish genocides. Is there a source for htis statement? What are the other three that you are referencing,? My presumption would be the Roman conquest of Judea, the Spanish Inquisition, and the Holocaust?
I never wanted to visit Jerusalem because of this... To me, nothing in a city that as seen so much blood spilled over it feels holy... P.S. Your videos about modern day Israel helped change that a little.
There's a lot more to the city today than religion; though a still a bit too much of that for my taste (avoid the northern neighborhoods if you value your safety). There's also a lot more than I can put in my videos; I went into much greater detail in my book. The Israel Museum was spectacular and I was lucky enough to arrive for snow. It's a far better city explored on one's own than as part of a tour group, that much is absolutely certain.
I wish I was covering history this modern with my students in Hebrew School (in their class I'm only covering really through Fall of 2nd Temple & Bar Kochba)....maybe if I have time at the end of the year I'll share it. This was so well done. Thank you!
given you have a fairly thick new york or new jersey accent, why the wierd prononciation of Rashi.? is that an attempt at a modern Israeli accent? if you will try that then you should also take a stab at more accurate pronciations of place names? great video otherwise...
