There is no fuck around or find out - in reality is just people wanting to control Jerusalem, because by controling that city they could control their own people. And that's what religion is for - proxy control. You give people a belief in the afterlife and at some father savior and then you impose laws and regulations on them that they won't break or they will lose their "place" in heaven.
"Before the very first crusade was launched in 1095, Muslims had invaded the following Christian lands. They had invaded, Christian Syria, Christian Jordan, Christian Palestine, Christian Egypt, Christian Algeria, Christian Libya, Christian Morocco, Christian Portugal, Christian Spain, Christian France, Christian Sicily, Christian Turkey, Christian Armenia, Christian Italy. All before the first crusade. The crusades are a legitimate response to Islamic aggression, and Islamic violence. I don't need to hear any lectures about the crusades from people who support Islamic colonialism, Islamic imperialism, Islamic dominion, and arabization." - Bob from Speakers Corner
Have you ever read about right of conquest, if you are not able to defend a land it is not yours.(you dumbos this was abolished way before ww1 so plz dont ask that again that is this valid for palestine)
@@imranshaikh6314 The Eastern Roman Empire was great in size. They would've defended themselves no problem from the early Muslim conquests, had they not just ended a costly war with the Sasanians during that time. They were in financial strain and manpower, and on top of that, rebellions in Africa weren't helping the situation. Muslims had no right to invade the Christian lands, and the crusades are entirely justified. Islam is a faulty religion, founded by a man who had raped a 9 year old child, and the only reason on why so many Muslims exist is because of the force conversion of the early innocent Christians.
@@imranshaikh6314The Eastern Roman Empire was great in size. They would've defended themselves no problem from the early Muslim conquests, had they not just ended a costly war with the Sasanians during that time. They were in financial strain and manpower, and on top of that, rebellions in Africa weren't helping the situation. Muslims had no right to invade the Christian lands, and the crusades are entirely justified. Islam is a faulty religion, founded by a man who had raped a 9 year old child, and the only reason on why so many Muslims exist is because of the force conversion of the early innocent Christians.
@@imranshaikh6314 @imranshaikh6314 The Eastern Roman Empire was great in size. They would've defended themselves no problem from the early Muslim conquests, had they not just ended a costly war with the Sasanians during that time. They were in financial strain and manpower, and on top of that, rebellions in Africa weren't helping the situation. Muslims had no right to invade the Christian lands, and the crusades are entirely justified. Islam is a faulty religion, founded by a man who had r-ped a 9 year old child, and the only reason on why so many Muslims exist is because of the force conversion of the early innocent Christians.
@@imranshaikh6314The Eastern Roman Empire was great in size. They would've defended themselves no problem from the early Muslim conquests, had they not just ended a costly war with the Sasanians during that time. They were in financial strain and manpower, and on top of that, rebellions in Africa weren't helping the situation. Muslims had no right to invade the Christian lands, and the crusades are entirely justified. Islam is a faulty religion, founded by a man who had raped a 9 year old child, and the only reason on why so many Muslims exist is because of the force conversion of the early innocent Christians.
@@EthelredHardrede-nz8yv Well, they were not two seperate kingdoms. It was very complicated at that time. Basically the normandy duchy conquered england while still being a vassal of france. We have to stop looking at it through a modern lense. We now know that they were never going to be reunited - but at that time it was very complicated.
Richard the lionheart was literally imprisoned by the "germans" when he was caught on his way back from the crusade. I like how this youtube video literally blames oversimplification in the first few videos and everyone literally goes ahead and oversimplifies everything - like the "barbarians" conquering western rome.
@@decimalauto read history about any war, and there will be good and evil. If The Muslims didn't kick Jews and Christians out of the Holy Land for no reason, the Crusades would have never happened
Calling the Crusades an unprovoked attack on Muslim territory is like calling D Day an unprovoked attack on German territory. I can understand saying that it was sad that it ever became necessary, but it's not shameful to fight for survival or to regain what was taken.
Insane comparison. It would be more like justifying Denmark invading Scania today because it used to be danish until 1658. The islamic world had not just captured Jerusalem four years before the crusades, you are either stupid or dishonest
I had to write a report on the crusades my sophomore year. I pretty much said what you’re saying here, and the teacher gave me a zero. She also threatened to fail me for the year because I defined Jihad as a holy war, even though I asked an actual practicing Muslim about the Islamic definition. This was 2014, I can only imagine how much history has been further bastardized since then
@@Pax-Islamica There are several different types of Jihad, and the "smaller jihad" which refers to holy war is MANDATORY for all Muslims who are able to do so as COMMANDED BY THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD. Stop doing dishonest Taqiyyah.
@@the_kimchi_kommandant2603 Where is that verse? Taqiyyah is not a concept Islam, it was invented by anti-Islam activists to silent Muslims. Engage in honest discussion instead of throwing terms that are the opposite of that,
The Crusades are a classic case of the kid who gets continuously bullied finally fighting back against his bully, but then he's the one to get in trouble for fighting back instead of the bully who started it.
Yeah but you guys have killed so much innocent people women kids.... But othmans was just fighting the army if the conquest a contry they don't a massacre like you guys do Christianity is a bloody religion
that makes no sense? land is land, and at this time it changed hands like a dollar bill. actually, till the 20th century, it changed hands thousands of times from hundreds of rulers in the span of decades. were they responding to the sultanate of rum's raids into byzantine cities? that's the only thing i can think of. the emirate of cordoba was far past expansion, the arab mamluks were sitting through their golden age, maybe taking a few slaves from sudan or something, but nothing really serious.
Funny how atheist only ever go after Christians and not the other two Abrahamic religions. You know, those other two. The one that kills you for criticizing it and the other one we’re not allowed to talk about.
For the most part Muslims are to. Busy attacking and defending with Christianity to bother with atheists. Atheists you encounter are from “Christian” countries so that is what they are usually speaking out against. If we were in a Muslim country then the resistance would be more Islamic focused. Atheists have the luxury to stand on the side lines shaking their heads at the gross and murderous nature of both arms of the abrahamic fairy tale and wish for better.
This is why I came back to THE faith. Our Abrahamic brothers are at each other's throats. Very soon a new Crusade will begin and it will not be pretty, for the God-slayers and Divinity Deniers.
@@theoneandonlybridge4210 Certain movements in late 1930s europe that wanted to avoid a certain fate modernism was leading europe into that is massively and purposely misunderstood by academics because even tho they had flaws, they were mostly right and sadly in 1945 they lost.
Same with Jewish atrocities, they were always blamed on the Italians or the Russians... For their most recent atrocities the Syrians and Afghans and Iraqis get the blame
As an atheist who has a great appreciation for learning history I’ve also been baffled by how often the crusades are portrayed as some unique evil among historical wars. Completely just ignoring the defensive nature of them and how Islamic expansion both pre and post dated them all
It's utter necessary in history learning to look at the past with the eyes of the past, not the eyes of the present. You can't just segregate few events of history and decide what was right and what was wrong according to your conteporary society values. It's less than appropriate and narrows down your insight over the course of events and facts.
any man saying that the muslims are the rightful owners of the holy land is an complete clueless idiot. aswell to any other religion other then the jews. king david built the place.
@adi_lowenthal_platt Oh for sure, that is why I emphasized 'portrayed as some unique evil' as in it and most wars of similar nature or around that time are evil in our retrospective morality.
Atheists have a unique hatred against Christians. Especially in the West, where they are seen as political/ideological enemies, as well as relics of a "shameful" past.
@adi_lowenthal_platt every war in history untill ww1 had war crimes because it was normal and allowed. And i agree with that ideology because u cant win a war by just killing off an army and leaving the enemy population in the area, it Couse instability and doesn't change the place just the leadership.
islamic maybe, but islam was somewhat nicer to its ppl compared to how european princes treated their peasants. But i dunno if islamic rulers will treat europe with the same tolerance if they conquered it. However considering their track record of treating christians in their domain (e.g. a tax for believing in christianity and barely anything else) plus only the first crusade did achieve anything, the other crusades where basically looting fellow christians.
If islam took over Europe someone like Marthin Luther would still destroy the religion and secularize the world. Don't forget that reinessance and reform weren't a result of western culture, they were a result of technological advancements and Islam wouldn't be able to hold on just like Christianity
I am from Mexico, not many know that we are the second country with the most Catholics in the world and we have been taught that the crusades were good since they prevented the expansion of Islam in Europe. I do not understand why in many European countries they talk about the crusades as something bad since it was to protect the European continent and the Christians
White liberals think that the catholic and traditionalistic Hispanics are somehow on their side and super pro lgbtqp+ and also hate God and their parents lmao.
Reason is:the rise of leftist, esp.communist ideology in Europe in the nineteenth century. Communist and socialist philosophers needed to portray the past of Europe in the worst way possible bc they advertised their ideology as something "new" and "better" and saw the Church as a rival.
if that's true why didn't they do the first crusade in hispania then? a place where there were actual european christians in actual peril? why did they randomly loot and raze constantinople, and rape and burn their own fellow christians in the byzantine empire?
The leftists in Europe are hellbent on destroying our culture, religion. They are brainwashed by secularists and a love of islam. The least democratic, most destructive religion of all. I can’t understand this suicide.
@@spyderman4206what interests lol. The interest wad to help Byzantium face the Seljuks, but the crusaders when advancing to Anatolia and the levant felt like Emperor Alexios did not help them enough, so the counts took the lands for themselves
They were promised gold, to have their sins forgiven and to enter heaven (from the trusty, wholesome, Vatican). But they had fun murdering, looting and raping along the way. Proper gentlemen the crusaders. God bless 'em.
As a french, I'm always surprised by the way the Crusades are viewed by the anglo-saxon public. I've never heard something as "The Crusade were aggression" or "a terrible crime". It was an adventure, driven by faith, and which gave rise to exchanges more than a simple fight between enemy religions. The Middle East being at the time one very diverse region, in its cultural and religious mix. Also, it should not be forgotten that, at the time of the Crusaders, the Middle East was a Christian land only a few centuries ago. Islam having only appeared in the 7th century and the first crusade taking place at the beginning of the 11th century
@@SIGNOR-G Mistakes like the sacking and massacre of Jerusalem and Antioch during the First crusade, huh? That little mistake that was the sacking of Constantinople led to Ottomans' conquest, and also opened a beachhead that the Turks used to conquer the rest of Eastern Europe, they even reached Vienna in 1529! Crusaders were nut f*cks, most of them were nobility's sons who couldn't inherit and wanted to take a big chunk of land for themselves or crazy maniacs like Raynald of Chatillon, thanks to their greedy asses the Romans finally fell
The more the left wing brain washing has grown, the stronger my Christian faith has grown. We need a rock of love, equality and peace to fight against the identity politics and totalitarian class systems instigated by neo-Marxism.
As an Romanian I can say that our history books appreciate the crusades , especially the late ones that we participated in like Varna , because the Ottomans have been a constant threat to us until the 19th century
Turkey still are. Romania is the most direct remnants of Byzantium. Turkey is one of the most provocative countries in the world. they are why the US got involved with Saddam Hussein. They didn't have to destablize iraqs water, but they chose to because they are the wrong type of muslim to each other. Hussein always promised that if Turkey built the dams, he would blow them up. Years later after Saddam is deposed, Turkey builds the dams and cause more havoc to all the downstream countries. From Syria to Iraq. Look how those have become hotbeds now that their water has destabilized. Turkey knew the play it was doing.
The issue I see many modern zoomers have is the notion that the Crusades were all failures other than the First Crusade. This misconception comes from the fact that the other Crusades were unable to retake the city of Jerusalem. But to be honest most modern historians over simplify the retaking of Jerusalem as the only true goal of the Crusades. Most Crusades actually didn’t even have this goal in mind. Looking beyond the recapture of Jerusalem the Crusades actually did yield some incredible results. The Northern Crusades and Reconquista were completely successful in the long term. The Third Crusade led to the capture of Cyprus, Tyre, and Jaffa. Richard Lionheart beat Saladin in all 3 of the major battles fought against one another, despite being outnumbered. This led to a Crusader military victory where Saladin was forced to be chill with Christians and was unable to expand further into the other Crusader states. Also the Sixth Crusade actually led to direct Christian control of Jerusalem once again. Really the Crusades have become a subject of historical misunderstanding and deliberate misleading by modern cut throat ideologues.
The issue is the same as the issue has been back then, the enemies of Christ are attacking us, or who owns the holy land now? The people that killed Christ?
@@ejoji4245 in the case of the original intent of the crusades to alleviate the eastern romans every crusade fails and yes the fourth crusade the most. Yet, in their own rights and intentions even the fourth crusade was a success..
@@simonst7645 the fourth crusade made way for the rising ottomans what are you on about? it wasnt successful in defending christendom or retaking land, it made way for a islamic empire to rise are you kidding?
In the Philippines, we studied the Crusades as a positive thing in schools. I was surprised that we view this history very different from Western standpoint.
@@stargategoku there was no Islamic expansion in east Asia and never an army from the Islamic caliphate set foot in it but Islam spread by the Yemenies traders and the people actually liked it not like the Christian who sended armys and colonised it by "force"
@@stargategoku the fall of the Islamic rule of andalusia because of the Muslims frist but what the Christian did to both Jews and Muslims citizens by the inquisition of torture inside dungeons
Here in germany the crusades are not seen as a pointless aggression. The crusades were an answer to the spread of islam and that is how it is taught in school here. I was pretty surprised by the man in the intro saying the cursades where the most shameful undertaking of human history. A statement which i would consider to be ridiculous and false. The conquests of the mongols were much worse for example. People today also tend to forget that we speak of times so vastly different to our own that we can't even attempt to understand how it was for people back in the middle ages. Everyone was a fanatical believer.
I'm actually scared to open modern textbooks with how things have been going in western Europe as of late. History is being recontextualized and altered in no small part due to the demographics changing. Which is concerning, considering history should always be objective.
Don't know why the crusades are portrayed as something bad in other countries but in my country(btw, I'm from Armenia) the crusades are portrayed as fight for the sake of Christians and Christianity and at the same time, nothing bad was written about muslims. It is an unbelievable honor to be a Christian due to the fact, that my country first accepted Christianity as a state religion and due to what my nation and my ancestors had to go through to remain as a Christian country. Love to everyone and stay safe out there. Carry on the legacy of your ancestors ❤️
Because, dear friend and brother in Christ, your country hasn't succumbed to the enemy of tradition and Christianity that is liberal laicism. The same cannot be said about my home country Spain, even if there are some like us who hold out. Hopefully we can revert this decay and restore our great Faith again. † ❤
That's cause the context of Armenia, Georgia, and even the Byzantine Empire is completely ignored in most western documentaries and movies on the events of the crusades, they kind of just put it as if catholics were simply bored of fighting each other and wanted to convert the whole world to christianity. I think in western culture and media, the crusades and colonialism are very much blended into one another, to create this appalling view of events, that Europeans have always been blood thirsty, racist group of people, that only seek to conquer. Which is very much not the case, since most of European history is actually about national stability.
@jackjones4824 I just want to understand your view on the umayyad caliphate and the Islamic crusades and their conquest and killings over thousands of innocent Cristians, Jews, and Zoroastrians? Also western Europe had just a much a claim to revenge as the Bzyantine Empire, the Islamic Crusades pushed well into Spain and Southern France, completing conquering the visigoths and the pieces of Frankish kingdom(both of which germanic tribes who had been converted to Christian). Also, let's not act like Islamic crusades needed to happen, or were somehow provoked, the Romes never pushed for control Arabian Dessert
The recently converted vikings went on a crusade in 1100. king sigurd the first was the first king to personally join a crusade and not a single battle was lost during his travels
"Recently" lol by the 1000's a lot of them were already Christian even in Scandinavia. Even more-so in Normandy earlier where it barely took a generation.
My ancestors moved to Normandy, France from Denmark. At that point they ceased to be Vikings Normans (Normanni, Latin) settled in the upper north of France and the area became known as Normandy. Their king, Rollo became a vassal to the French king. They became fiercely Catholic and the popes employed them against infidels. Charles Martel fought with the Muslims and forced them out of France in a battle at Toulouse. They also went to Sicily and basically chased the Greek Orthodox Church out.
why is that a surprise? scandinavia was converted by the sword, the ones that weren't executed or took up the sword against their kin would naturally be drawn to this. the crusades within europe were however more barbaric than the ones in the levant
@bennyklabarpan7002 it was actually kings that convinced their people to convert. i mean, hell, sweyn folk beard converted, and he still acted like a pagan while the rest of his subjects were christian as missionaries came from Germany and started slowly converting to Christianity until they were all Christian so sweyn folk beard decided to convert as his people didn't like his pagan beliefs
The Austrian flag has its origins in the Third Crusade (1189-1192). The Babenberger Leopold V was an Austrian duke. It is said that after the siege and subsequent battle of Akkon, his white robe was completely soaked in blood, save for a white stripe where he wore his sword belt. In 1191, Heinrich VI gave Leopold the red-white-red coat of arms. After the Babenbergs died out, the Habsburgs inherited the coat of arms and it became the colors of the House of Austria. It's one of the oldest, still in use, flags.
@@MicahDAmato a quick search on google will tell you Austria was the ones who declared war. They were also on the German side aka the BAD side, aka the villains.
As Assyrian Christian I just find the modern view of Christianity in general weird they suggested that the Christian faith has notions or attitudes that are openly hostile which they never do to any other faith especially those the modernist openly counter such as Islam
@@Handle0108 the Christians are expected to accept and tolerate the social decay and lgbt stuff that they don’t put on muslims as they are instead exotise them at the moment
@@assyrianchristian764 that is the fault of Christians for being weak and not Muslims or the media. If you tolerate everything people will keep demanding and pushing more on you, and unfortunately nowadays Christians are not willing to stand up for their values. Muslims on the other hand stand by and defend every letter of their holy book and religion.
@@assyrianchristian764 as a muslim it is quite sad to see the state of affair of religion in the modern day. Alot of Christians cater to easily to athiesm and secularism as it slowly eats away at the very core beliefs of Christianity. Nowadays it's getting hard to even tell what exactly a Christian is when so much of the religion is being changed. Some Christians think saving the faith means joining Christian fundamentalists organizations and spreading hate to other religions and all this does is push Christianity into a political ideology. The reason why islam is so successful right now is due to how robust it is, the people are both tolerant yet Intolerant, A perfect blend. I feel as though for Christianity to truly be saved in this era they must return to the source. Practice Christianity the way the early Christians did at the time of Jesus, bring back the old methods of praying, bring back the headscarf, bring back The old ways to better battle this culture war. Other wise I don't see Christianity surviving against this future, liberal, secular, Lgbt future that will eventually reach every home.
"It took Christianity 300 years of being put to the sword by Islam, having 2/3 of the Christian world conquered - with millions butchered, and over a million more Europeans carted off across the Mediterranean into slavery before the first crusade was called."
@@Spacebartreal they spread through largely peaceful means at that point, Egypt, Anatolia, North Africa, Iberia, Syria, Ethiopia, Armenia, modern Jerusalem and Palestine where converted through peaceful means. they where the spiritual guides the general populace liked and kings liked how effective their administration assistance could be. only the Balkans and germanic/skandinavian raiders where converted at sword point.
@@bmetalfish3928 What about the native americans , massacre of the aboriginals of australia and natives of newzealand. Christianity also spread through colonisation, look at south america. This video is extremely biased as it ignores the massacres christians have committed during that era and later on. Anyway Religion has died not only in europe but globally, the adoption of secularism has been completed worldwide and the masses have left their religious beliefs for a secular and more free lifestyle. You and i both know this is true and its time we all accept what society has become, irreligious and secular
@@bmetalfish392810 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.[12] -Deuteronomy 20:10-14
To add further context, Mohammed himself had planned to attack Byzantium, but died in 632 before he was able to get there. The first siege of Constantinople began 42 years later in 674. By the time of the first Crusade in 1095, Muslim armies had been attacking the West for over 400 years before the European powers decided to counter attack. I think almost half a millennium of aggression is more than enough justification to take the fight to the enemy. The Europeans were definitely not the aggressors in this situation.
The crusade of Levant was actually a waste of time had they retaking Anatolia for the Byzantine or Egypt I think the crusade would last for long the levant is open bored hell hole the saljik . Ayoubid kurds abbasid fatimed it just hell
The Muslim-Byzantine relations became worse after the Ghassanids had killed the Prophet’s (PBUH) ambassadors which led to the first skirmish between the Muslims and the Byzantines in Mu’tah, 629 CE
I have been saying this for literally my whole life. By taking the 'Holy Land' back from the Muslims most Islamic military effort was focused on regaining it rather than attacking Christendom around the Mediterranean or through the Balkans. The almost 200 years gained (1099-1291) was crucial in enabling Europe to survive.
@@tvbopc5416survive what? muslim spain was around for centuries. how many wars did they have with the rest of europe? founders of oxford studied there for crying out loud, stop painting an apocalypitic threat as if there was total war and christians were killed on sight
I'm no expert in history, Islam, Christianity, or much of anything. BUT I do know that my school system taught us about the Crusades, but never even so much as mentioned the Islamic Conquests. I think there is something seriously wrong with that. If we are gonna talk history, let's talk all of it, not just selective portions.
It what made me hate World History overall because they kept skipping important events. This is why I love the fact I went to seek my own understanding of history and told myself why didn’t they tell me about this in school?
If You are from the West, You’ll be educated in Western history that’s deemed relevant to You. There is a reason the Crusades have been part of Western educational curriculum for centuries. Don’t forget, the majority of the Western World were still practicing Christians up into the 20th century and the narrative most of Us were taught about the Crusades, was only that of pilgrimage and liberation. Only, that’s not entirely true. Funnily enough, the Muslim conquests into Europe aren’t interpreted w/in the Islamic World as being necessarily positive, particularly after the first Crusade. Comparing how Our cultures interpret these events is both surprising and interesting. However, if You’re truly interested in learning about this part of history, watching Videos like the one We’re commenting on, is definitely not the place to start. I’d recommend learning about the religions and their denominations to begin with, that’ll give You a better understanding of things. ‘Usefulcharts’ & ‘Let’s talk Religion’ channels are good, credible and tangible sources of information on this topic.
Looking up human evolution & migration of Europe and archaeology and then the mythology of each civilisation. Huge ass pieces of history have never been taught in schools.
When I was reading a book about the Crusades, I forget which book, but the telling of the 1st Crusade always made me giggle. "Things were going bad but then the Franks got really mad and the day was won."
Another win for the Franks!!! Losing 1 war against the most advanced army of the time with some of the greatest soldiers of all time and being remembered for only that sucks. Franks have had many great battle victories. That story is funny. So remember, when they're pissed, fighting is not good!
Crusades killed many Jews that believe in Yeshua (Jesus). I don`t know if you know, but all of you will respond for these actions, because you also support it.
your conclusions regarding our historical past.....are refreshingly rich in truth .....I believe....good work again!!! Though be careful that you don't become a simple pendulum of opinion
@danzeband1498 It's likely something similar happened back then, with local infighting and stupidity like now. The Christian way of turning the other cheek is sometimes good in terms of showing impulse control and a belief in civility and order. It's bad because it takes longer to provoke necessary retaliation. This time many will have to rediscover Christ and Jesus as well.
Actually a lot has changed now… for the worse. In europe now there are millions of muslims, they are not even europeans by heritage, and they don’t shy about making Europe dominated by Islam.
@@williamrobert9898 🤣 LOL. Please let the butthurt Christians of this comment section live in a fantasy land where they think killing women and children and raping those who are left was a good thing. It’s funny to watch
@@mercenaryknight5419 I only saw the director's cut and was surprised reading afterwards how much of the movie was actually true. The most important faults I guess are Saladin and his army being more mild than reality, some of the important Crusaders being made the clear antagonists, and the details around Balian being changed to ease the watcher into the Eastern world.
I think there’s a sport in north America that does just that. U get blunt weapons, real armors, and go crazy on a 1v1 or something up to 8v8. Childhood come to life.
As a 'non white christian,' i consider the crusades to be ridiculous european shenanigans that have nothing to do with christianity, I personnally don't refer or think of any of this stuff as having to do with christianity, christianity is about jesus christ, not about your race or country, or hating musims and jews
@@al-muwaffaq341 the Muslims were far worse. That’s like asking a Jewish person, would you rather live in Nazi Germany, or Rome? Of course I’m choosing Rome, even if they did suppress the Jews they weren’t nearly THAT bad in comparison!
@@nooneknowsidc literally before the Arabs conquered Egypt the Byzantines literally persecuted them and any other denomination of Christianity that wasn’t Orthodox. That’s why these people submitted and joined the Arabs.
haha, just remind me why did the Coptic betray the Byzantine multiple times..? is it because they were persecuted? The coptic and the semites were persecuted for racial and rhetoric beliefs wasn't it..? Do you remember what happened to the pagan coptics by the romans and the christian coptics..?
@@Thanatos6 yes forced you are considered a second class citizen if your not Islamic in Islamic countries assuming they don't just kill you if your gay
Thanks for the video. As an Arab Christian, of course, they never show this side of history and during school, the Crusaders were often described as barbaric, while the Muslims of course are merciful. I wish we could all learn pure history with no biases.
(Ignore my arab name, I'm syrio-brazilian) Wait, do you mean in what country? Because with so much communist revisionism, I'm almost sure western education pictures crusaders much worse than muslim world education.
The ayyubis were indeed more merciful by the standard of their time. Saladin was remembered in europe and earned limbo in dante poems. His descendants were also more inclined to be merciful to subsequent crusading knights. In history there are no black and white. The past is packed full of diverse characters each deserving more than the stereotypical images which we project onto them.
Funny how the Christians were so kind to the people of the Americas, the people of the North Caucasus when the Teutonic Knights went on gruesome crusades to eradicate paganism. What mercy was that? When did Muslims ever treat you Christian Arabs badly? On the contrary, those crusaders killed Orthodox Christians indiscriminately during the First Crusade. This is the kind of rule you wanted to live under?
@@connr8691 Not every Islamic conquest was a holy war either. Gullible commoners like you were stoked into a frenzy against “foreign” peoples throughout the ages. Rome did it, the Greeks did it, the British empire did it, the United does it. And what does it matter what the cause of conquest was? Whether political, economic, or religious in nature, conquest is conquest. Islamic conquests we’re generally benign to the natives, in comparison to western conquests in the east. As for the “cause” of the initial conquests. You may want to fine tune your history knowledge. Both the Byzantine empire (what was left of rome) and the Persians had Arab lands and Arab vassals under their thumb. What you call the initials”Islamic” conquests are in fact Arab reconquests of their own territory.
Imagine enduring centuries of Jihad and then people going "yeah the crusades? especially evil time in human history... imagine fighting people over religion." I can almost imagine the faces of the crusaders both confused and angry in equal measure at the sheer ignorance of modern europeans on this matter
Christian's. Know most crusades were declared against other Christian's, right? The video cherry picks the first few, but whether you're talking about Cathars in southern France or pagans in the Baltic, most crusades were either declared against groups not a threat to Christian lands or against fellow Christians.
Well crusades are waste literally also I know Christianty and Islam I mean Muslim ended after ottoman defeated byantizine the capital Constantine which ended it also why don't the guy mention the peace between sallhuddin and Baldwin also he hates Islam ofcourse he made this to justify crusades Templars killed all Muslims in Jerusalem I wish you respect brother I don't meant hate just explain he hates islam for jihad and terrorist
@@thefool1086 literally no written records exist of the Cathars themselves so, just like rumors of witchcraft in Salem, we should take any authirs possible motivation into account for context. What we do know is that Langedouc had enjoyed more autonomy from the French crown before the Albegensian crusade and afterward was forced militarily to submit to the French crown, a major victory for the expansion of the French crown. A coincidence, then, that an Gnostic religion first recorded in Eastern Europe would have such a wellspring in southern France as to require a crusade....
Ive often wondered how things wouldve been different during the third crusade if barbarossa hadnt died and the french hadnt abandoned richard the lionheart. Its amazing he had any success on his own against saladin
One small addendum: Christianity had spread to east Africa early like 50ad, and the kingdoms east and south of Egypt adopted Christianity as their official region about 100 before it became the official religion of the Roman Empire in the 320’s. They’re some of the oldest churches are in that region. But it is slightly different branch than became Catholicism.
People also forget about the many Christians that existed on the eastern side of the middle east and into Asia. Maybe not majorities or countries defined by Christianity, but they were there.
We should also mention that in Rome there was a strong opposition and, even though the faithful had to go underground for many years, Christianity was there. When Christianity was officialised by the local states is not really relevant. Both St. Paul and St. Peter went to Rome where they were both killed in 67ad. Peter had the authority given by Jesus to found His Church.
I remember my history teacher in high school very much pushed this idea about the crusades. he even lamented the fact that charles martel stopped the muslims from entering europe because that would have stopped europe from entering the dark ages. And then taking history in university I've pretty much learned the complete opposite when it comes to medieval history
Charles Martel didn't do it against Islam btw, Islam was not even fully established, it was rapidely expanding and it was seen as another christian heresy. Muslims were doing razzias (raids) on Aquitaine region, and Martel stopped them in a battle that didn't seem so important for the muslims. Then he proceeded to raid Aquitaine too and sack many cities
I guess they were right then. The crusade was a political move by the Pope where he disregarded all points of christianity to fulfil his dreams of a bloody conquest.
Those people in the media are all FreeMaySons which has its roots in Kabb Alism and the lsIamic world. Some of their orders, like the Shhriners, pay homage to that origin.
I am Armenian, and due to church records I know that I am related to Levon I the Magnificent , who was the ruler of Armenian Cilicia, one of the main Allies of Western Europe during the crusades. I have lots of stories passed down that I could share too. Overall pretty neat stuff and it’s sad almost 0 Armenians live in Cilicia these days. I also speak western / Cilician Armenian , the Constantinople dialect to be exact, which is unfortunately almost extinct. I’m really glad you mentioned Armenian Cilicia in this video. 💪💪
Make sure you write it down. The most important words. The ancient words. And the terms. It is important. I did the same for some archaic North Norwegian words. And it turns out, I find them in Norse dialects all over Scandinavia now. Language is our history, so remember it! Much love from Norway!
As a Greek and a historian, I can safely say that this interpretation of the Crusades is not so present here in my country - Somewhat encounterable on the societal level, but certainly not on the academic level whatsoever. Our cultural heritage aligns with the Byzantine/Eastern-Roman Empire, which at the outbreak of the Crusades had been slowly losing territory first to the Fatimid and later Seljuk Empires for well over a century at least. As mentioned, the reason the Crusades even took place is because Emperor Alexios called upon Christendom in the West for help in a losing war when the Seljuks were nearly at the gates of Constantinople. In their own way, the Crusades were simply another phase of the Byzantine-Seljuk Wars. Our own cultural point-of-view is one that disproves the more modern western interpretation of the Crusades.
I am a bit taken aback by this video, because it makes this interpretation of the Crusades as mainstream, but even in the West (US) this is not a very academically-rigorous interpretation.
@Byzantine Historian From what I see, here in Greece people see the crusades as a very positive thing, those who know a little more dislike the 4th crusade for obvious reasons But generally speaking we Greeks think the crusades were cool
Europe would be Islamic if not for the crusades, I'm an atheist but I can appreciate wanting to hold on to culture and way of life.They did what they thought they should, and was the only time in history Europeans stopped fighting each other for a time and made relations between Christian nations much less hostile.
Western Christians sacked Constantinople and then refused to help when the Ottomans laid siege......the West didn't let Constantinople fall, it intentionally weakened it and ensured it's conquer. Remember that the Catholic Church and it's Pope saw the Constantinople Orthodox Church as an enemy that was a danger to it's influence back then.
Indeed, it was the main cause for the taxation at the commercial sea routes, that ended leading making news ways to travel to Asia and more. It also led to the arrival to America by Christopher Columbus, being part of the history of the world.
Thank you for outlining this. I knew the Crusades were preceded by Islamic wars far latger, longer, and more atrocious, but this goes a long way to put it all together. God bless you.
@dukedase7 You're welcome to put forth your own evidence, but I've seen this kind of take verified by a prominent ex-Muslim who had everything to lose by doing so.
One group you failed to mention who were instrumental in the Crusades were the "Italians" and Sicilians (I put quotes because Italy did not exist at the time). Venice, the Papal states around Rome and of course the Sicilians (recently under the Normans) were the transporters and fighters since they knew the Mediterranean region and how to navigate supplies by boat (i.e. through Messina).
@thequacken6301 they fucking destroyed the greatest Christian city in the entire world and 100% opened the doors to Ottoman expansion later on. They almost ended Christianity by doing that. It's very plausible Vienna is taken and Islam keeps marching.
@@duckkk530 explain. Cause the last “Christian” terror group operated during the 1920s, but they didn’t follow the word of God, they followed Satan, so technically they aren’t Christian despite claiming to have been. However, I can’t name a single non-Muslim terror group that is STILL ACTIVE TODAY.
I read a history book on the crusades, and it covered every crusade in very deep detail. Ever since then, I have been waiting for something like this to finally enter public view. Edit: I finally found the name of the book. “God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades”
I want something more.A new crusade to drive the mongrels even further Islam is disgusting they only bring pain and suffering upon this world the Greek empire brought civilization and wealth whereas the Islamic people only know how to destroy.
I'm not from Europe, yet the crusades were never seen in a "bad light", they were seen and teached as the Christian response to the Islamic agressions, but even with that, it is great to see a video that talks about it in depth.
(I'm not from Arabia, but the terrorist bombing attacks were never seen in a "bad light", they were seen and teached as the Muslim response to Christian aggression) imagine if a Muslim said that, you hippocrates would went crazy
The truth hurts, especially for the christians. You can learn the truth by studying the history of free mason and how king richard made use of his people under the name of christianity, when its actually his own deep interest in black magic. Thats why, templars are closely related to magic until today.
It wouldn't be this one. The movie the uploader of this video gushes over is full of historical inaccuracies about Baldwin IV of Jerusalem. He was a 15-year-old teenage king who watched his men fight for him. He became unable to ride a horse at age 16 due to having lost sensation in his arms and legs, soon losing his fingers and toes, then completely disabled until he died at the age of 24. Not what this video represented, huh?
As a Muslim myself, the context in this video does show why the crusades really occurred. It is understandable if Muslims put themselves in the shoes of the Christians living at that time. Both Christians and Muslim warriors over the centuries have committed atrocities unfortunately, but it is always nice looking at the positives of generally negative events in history. I also appreciated the efforts of Emperor Frederick II showing true diplomacy in the sixth crusade. Great job Pax Tube, subscribed! Greetings from Dubai 🇦🇪
Most Muslims see the Crusade as a war of Christian aggression against Islam but they forgot that Islam was spread by the conquest of Christian land (and the Sassanid Persia). Perhaps it's this one-sided view of history that causes Muslims youth more susceptible to extremism as they see what happens in the modern world (war, civil conflict and poverty in Muslim countries) as a continuation of the Crusade by the "West".
Dude both were on the wrong, the only ones who trully suffered were the true religious. There wasnt a positive at all, only petty leaders in search of conquest manipulating the people and leading us astray from Allah
Good work on being informed of both perspectives. I've never met humans who are wholly bad or wholly good. We're all fallible, contradictory and complex at various points.
Not all the crusades, the ones against orthodox Christians were not, we don’t need latin barbarians to push their heresy on us but sure the crusades against the Muslims were cool
La reconquista no tuvo razón de ser ni fue una reconquista de por sí, los reinos cristianos pelearon entre ellos tanto como pelearon contra los musulmanes, y figuras icónicas como el Cid incluso pelearon DEL LADO de los musulmanes jajaj. Además, qué legitimidad tenían los godos que no tuvieran los omeya o los amazigh? Si no fuera por toda la propaganda carlista y franquista se darían cuenta q los musulmanes enriquecieron la cultura e historia española tanta como los godos, romanos y cartagineses.
You'd think the religious conflicts like the Spanish civil war, Russian revolution and subsequent civil war, Chinese civil war, Cambodian genocide, and even recent conflicts in Africa where leftists/Muslims all come of looking worse would rank higher And also, the Mexican revolution was much, much worse
@ailediablo79 "Don't want to force people to convert." It's spelt out in the sharia. Trying to deny that along with what aboutism is dishonest. Keep coping it's absolutely barbaric, at least the pope excommunicated the crusaders in the 4th crusade.
@ailediablo79 o9.8 The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4)-which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Mlim or else pay the non-Mslim poll tax o9.0 JIHAD (O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion Ya I am not really in a mood to entertain blatant denial or asinine defenses. Read some history.
@Joseph Avenetti ideology doesn't take God into consideration and offers solutions from this world FOR the problems of this world. Religion offers solutions from God, from the "other" world for problems that are bigger than economics and politics
Im glad to see this getting talked about. I remember going through history classes in school and learning about these events and being alone among my peers and teachers about how the crusades were to fight back against the muslim forces and that the jihads were, at least, no better than the crusaudes and provoked the christian lands though war not just ideologies.
@@ljss6805 Nah, you just don't know history. Muslims had been launching unprovoked attacks against Europe for decades prior to the Crusades. The Crusades were just a retaliatory strike in an attempt to end the threat of the warmongering desert people for good.
@@ljss6805 He is completely accurate. Islam only spread through the levant, north africa, southern and eastern europe through conquest by arms. Guess what people dont like when you invade and take their shit or force convert their neighbors. The christian response to muslim aggression was entirely justified.
Imagine a crusader, who fought muslims hand to hand- in Muslim territory- finding out that we are now wholesale importing muslims by the the thousands AND supporting them socially and economically.
@@firstnoob3811 in the top 10 poorest countries only 2 are Muslim countries while the other 8 are Christian. So why do you lie? Most poor countries are actually Christian keep coping 😂😂😂
It blows my mind how modern narratives are basically that the bad guys are good and the good guys are bad, and nobody knows enough about the history to question it
History is a work of construction, not discovery. It's important to remember that history is only 20% chronological events and 80% narrative interpretation; Jules Michelet's account of the French Revolution rivaled Victor Hugo for its romantic rhetoric, and Alexis de Tocqueville's rendering of that same event was a tragedy worthy of Racine. During this time period, only the wealthy and upper social classes were taught the privilege of literacy; so history carries their perspective.
It's safe to say, if you're a Christian fighting to keep land away from the government and migrants, protecting your communities and families and keeping them homogenous, you're on the right side of history.
I loved crusaders when I was little but then as I got a bit older, I found out that they sacked Constantinople in 1204, that one sack decimated the Eastern Roman Empire and ultimately weakened them enough that they fell in 1453. Eastern Roman was one of my favourites. Christians attacking Christians, killed and looted their own brothers.
my cultural teacher was demonising Christianity and I am a believer in Christ I was not able to defend my faith but now that I have the information thank you good sir for helping me find a way to open the eyes of my classmates
"demonizing Christianity" lol get real. christians have done terrible things in the name of Jesus. many would argue they brought it upon themselves with their own actions.
@@dllemonI think the Bible says if you are being forced to go against what the Bible says, then you can break that law. This might be an extension of that. In addition, the conquering of Jerusalem was a just war, as were the other wars David waged in the Old Testament
@@dudebro91-fn7rz I mean, if they’re a professor I’m sure theyve had a long time to gather evidence and examples against you, and that could be hard to combat at the beginning. Eg. the genocide in the Old Testament(which was acceptable because the people were offspring of demons so they weren’t actual humans, but you wouldn’t know that without context)
Thank you for this - so sick of feeling pressured to apologize for Christian history by atheist ‘intellectuals’ - notice how they never direct their ire at Islam?
I'm an atheist and i hate both Islam and Christianity. And we are many. But of course people like would always conveniently ignore the existence of people like me, you prefer to point at the low hanging fruits, the easy targets that feed your narrative.
you dont have to apologize for other ppls actions, Islam aswell, but you have to agree this video is very biased and pro-christian that's why you like it, you can tell by the tone and adjectives used for the opposing side
@@Mercury-1820 I wonder what would be the pro-Muslim stance. Muslims where those who did not belong there, they should have expected other war lords to go against them. They are fighters, waged wars from the beginning. Wars are nasty. And you reap what you sow, I guess. The Crusades shouldn't have happened, too many people died. But the Muslim conquest of those lands shouldn't have happened too. See? Even after 1400 years, people are needlessly dying there, including little children and women. The Muslims should have stayed in Medina and spread peacefully. Peace would have been part of the religion and even if they reached as far as Jerusalem, nobody would fight. And if they have fought, that wouldn't have been Islam§s fault.
Amazing video. Really goes to show that people can attempt to spread inaccurate representations, but eventually the truth will overtake them. In addition, history can usually not be simplified into a good/bad representation, as history is usually quite complex in nature.
@@jacobi-p8k You're putting words in my mouth. I never said or implied that "everything I disagree with" is an inaccurate representation. I was talking about the ideas that are prevalent in my country that the crusades were cruel, a form of agression and perpetrated against innocent states. This is also what I meant with "truth". The truth is that there were multiple viewpoints, instead of "crusades were cruel agression, end of sentence". It's as if you are reacting to me saying "the crusades were fair and justified" (which I never stated). So it seems that you yourself have quite the emotional knee-jerk reaction to someone who has a different opinion than you, my friend.
@@rockstar450 none of the sources you have ever had, actually date back to a relevant point to hold legitimacy. You've deep-throated BS propaganda on the subject since you've been born
Atheists turn first on their original religion and shoot fire so they don't get accused of biased......or accused of hidden Preaching....(Which are the lowest of the lowest) Saint Paul syndrome
"culture of Critique for normies" is a great explanation why. It definitely is not part of our society to hate itself. It is being perpetuated by a foreign hostile elite. We did not wake up with suicidal desires as a civilization. We will win, have faith brother ✊
It came from communism. Communism perpetuate academia. Its an anti western idea so western academia interprets history in line with this anti western (meaning anti christian) narrative.
That is a direct result of western cultural hegomony snowflake. You will get a fair treatment when your culture stops being a global culture, until then you are gonna put up with this cuz there is nothing you can do
That is how my family became atheist. I think the crusades are 100 percent justified, and I wish we could unite as secular western and Christian men to battle the evil of Islam once again.
As a Hispanic Latin Christian , I can tell you my Peninsular ancestors were more than justified in their struggle to liberate their homeland from foreign Pagan invaders .The Crusade was a restablishment of sovereignty against an agressive foreign presence . And think of all the splendor of the Ancient World that was erased by the Islamic invasion .The Latin and Hellenistic speaking groups in Western Asia , the Coptics , the Armenians and many more Christian cultures and cities of old .And they complain about the Crusades as unjustified .
@@superspy-xv9sx 1- Under the Jizyah humilliation and more than common killings . 2- The great wealth of al-Andalus was mostly propaganda and for the Arabs , no one else , not even the Berbers .
@@oolooo Well how were they able to build so much amazing architecture then? Plus, the Caliphate was also split off from most of the rest of the Arab world
I'm grateful to have found a TH-camr like you who shares views I have, for a long time I felt I was alone but I'm glad that's not the case. The Crusades are certainly greatly misunderstood, but we all know why. The topic itself hits harder for me since I live in Ireland where Catholicism has faced relentless attacks from media and government and all their cronies, another crusade is long overdue in general.
I didn't know much about the crusades personally, but I've never felt so proud to be a Catholic than I do after watching this. We need to bring crusading back for sure
I should not advice this, but ill do it anyway. PIRATE THAT VIDEO. PIRATE IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Or else yt will delete it if it will hit to high number of views.
This video has a bunch of historical inconsistencies and is a reason why history should not be learned from a random guy on the internet. This comment will probably get deleted but I feel the duty to say what's right. 1. Islam does not introduce slavery anywhere. Slavery exists before islam and is prominent in Asia especially, but also in Europe. 2. Whether it was"right" or "wrong" to conquer lands that were previously Christian is not a point of argument. Do you want to go all the way back and talk about how half the Balkans was forced into Christianity? Is Christian colonization okay, but Islamic colonization wrong? 3. Muslims turning Christian lands into Muslim, introducing "dhizya" (this is the correct word for the tax that was introduced to nonmuslims). This part is correct. Muslims did not exactly force conversion, but as they were conquering countries they would impose a tax on non Muslims only. So they gave an "incentive" so to say, to turn to islam. And for poor people, this wasn't really an incentive. They had no choice. Christianity in the past had different tactics. In the Balkans they had collective conversions, as in, people wod gather on a place to accept christianity. Whoever refused was forced into it. I'm only making this point because it seems like you want to say "these were christian lands". You also keep forgetting that, in the times like in the past, people move where the wind blows. Basically, you want to live a good life and you will convert to whatever they want you to. Today, from our comfy homes where we have access to all parts of the world via internet, we cannot grasp this feeling. 4. To whom the holy lands should belong is also beside the point. 5. Muslim inhabitants are portrayed as peaceful, not because they are oh so peaceful, but mostly because the European people that went on crussades were a bunch of bloodthirsty hooligans looking for revenge and the people they were attacking were not exactly expecting it. Muslims were never known as exactly peaceful people. And also it's fair to know that at the time, the middle east, although in Muslim rule, was bustling with inhabitants of different religions. 6. Europe's dark ages have little to do with rise of islam. Middle ages in Europe are called dark mainly because of wars (crussades also a part of this), stagnation in scientific developments due to church prosecuting anyone who steps out of line, and various illnesses (including the plague) as well as the rise of Muslim empires. This is not to say European empires were oh so amazing, but suddenly the Muslims in the east, be it Arabs or later Ottomans, wjo were known as uneducated nomads- were suddenly turning into empires on almost the same footing as themselves, which caused fear. I don't like your "one is better than the other" agenda. We are talking about people here. All are the same. Another characteristic of Middle ages is constant changes in borders in Eruope, movement of people within Europe, Church literally burning people for scientific discoveries- a whole bunch of stuff happened within Europe that had nothing to do with Muslims. This is the reason why historians call it dark ages.
Some kings were good, other kings were trash, some spared everyone, others killed everyone, thats what happened and still happens today, but now, no one cares...
“Gods Battalions: The Case for the Crusades” is a great book by Rodney Stark that details the first few crusades and explains the growing tensions leading up to them. Give it a read!
I absolutely will. Thanks for recommending this. I need to educate myself on this topic. I constantly hear about Christendom being demonized over this topic but I know that Islam isn't this innocent helpless bystander that people make it out to be.
1.When the Muslims took the holy land they enslaved 0 people, stole 0 wealth, allowed anyone who wanted to, to leave, invited jews back after the Christians had murdered and expelled them and allowed all Roman politicians to leave with as much gold as they could saddle on their mounts. When the Christians retook Jerusalem, they smashed babies heads against the walls of the Masjid and killed all jews and non Catholic Christians they managed to capture, so much so the Orthodox and Jews sided with the Muslims. 2. The Jizya, the tax Dhimmis paid, was not a huge tax, it was less than zakkat paid by Muslims, it exempted Christians and Jews from military service and gave them the right to govern themselves and rule their community by their own laws. What Catholic land allowed Jews and Muslims to do that while paying less than themselves lol? 3.The people of the Levant converted to Islam by choice, over centuries. We know this because we have written records of people converting and then paying zakkat. Which completely debunks this spread by the sword notion.
I have some issues with a few points brought up in the video: The slaves Muhammed captured where evil warriors he never took innocents as slaves only the warriors who opposed him. He freed multiple slaves and a freed slave and black man was the first Muslim to give the call to prayer. The man converted to Islam and was brutally punished by his pagan masters but Muhammed bought him for nearly 20x the normal price of a slave just to free him. You couldn't mistreat slaves in Islam. The reason slavery is still done is because the areas are underdeveloped Islam has no part in this western colonizers do however. Islamic empires took slaves but so did Christian empires and colonizers they would do the same thing if they where in our position that's just truth. No good or bad in history everyone did things for their own gain. Other than that the rest of the video was great! Religious people should be more friendly towards each other to protect ourselves from atheists and the like.
@@farzan1958 Akhi taking the wives and children of thd kuffar you defeat in warfare is halal. To deny this is kufr Akhtar as you deny the Quran. Nabi SAW took slaves and married the wives of the defeated Pagans. ALHAMDULILLAH
When you said at 10:50 "ambitious" knights: something to take note is that there was a mini- baby boom within the generation. Many muslims would point to this and say "they wanted to fight for they had nothing to do, nothing to loose" but infact the proffessional knights were not the 2nd and onward sons that had little but the first sons which had EVERYTHING to loose in terms of land, status and all. - atleast for the generation of the first crusade. Other than the first few crusades, The battle of Lepanto and how it was one with the rosary was outstanding. Over all well enough video for the modern man, but as a history man that loves details. real crusades history provides all nonbias approach and much work and I think should be promoted more.
@AileDiablo you make alot of fine points, you speak often on all Muslims collectively. Different rules do different things 1st crusade was justified and in modern words was a total clutch on the crusaders against seljuik turks which did many very very bad things. The other ones loose steam as you point out and that's OK, and with that I shall make my point on the ottomans. The ottomans were relatively some of the nicest out of their predecessors. And I respect aspects of their culture but they still did have a slave trade of sorts, and as those in Spain climbed upward, so did ottomans as seen with battle of Viena and battle of Malta was protecting Italy. Some of the battles both Christians and Muslims were going at it intensively as we would label today "war crimes". On Muslims we had our bouts, I disagree with some of your policies and understand others. One excellent example is to do with 9/11 (the 2001 one since 9/11 is an iconic date for west to fight with islam) Muslims have policy of not having heathen armies in your land (as a ukrainian I empathize with this as little terrorists sitting in our lands lead to invasion) which lead to attack which now all 3 of us know and fight for freedom for freedom is not free! Tho many things in Christianity proper I respect I realize even our execution of these ideas are not perfect so to some effect I don't hold you so heavily. I have friends in Istanbul which I see as honorable. Been typing for while but you talked much about Arian vs nonArian which sometimes we settled argumentativly and sometimes it boiled to military action, I would have pointed to albigensium crusade since we wiped then out (even tho they were stronger military, prayer gave us the upper hand, clutch poggers) Which you mock the trope of blue eye Jesus, which yes is not so historical (many icons do show historical variety but) the purpose of stuff like that is to have the message be comfortable for all nations. Rather than having say Arab culture infused into all other cultures (which would make Arab culture less unique and take away stuff from other cultures) we try to eliminate what bad paganism is but retain whatever culture can be so to tell the truth in the emphasis that they value. As both of us share the philosophy that since God created all- all peoples have had atleast a part of God's message and that must be used if you were to introduce God back to them. Tho we had our bouts what is most important is to pray, prayer is what leads us closer to the Almighty. Have a good day sir
@AileDiablo the reason why many convert is so they would get a better life in the Muslim country so they don't have to pay more tax just to live there, so they don't have to fear to be taken into slavery. The Ottoman empire attacks into the Balkans and yes they would force convert, even today force conversion is a thing but does not mentioned widely. Islam didn't protect all religions, if they are then they wouldn't say jews are bad because they didn't believe in the prophet, they wouldn't mock Jesus death on the cross, but they did.
@AileDiablo Your considerations are legitimate, but not entirely accurate. Forced conversion is prohibited in all Abrahamic religions, yet it was still present, as seen in areas that were Islamized by the Mongols, whose power was based on terror and large-scale massacres. The Arab expansion was halted due to internal wars that led to multiple changes in power until the definitive Ottoman takeover, after which they resumed expansion, including the conquest of Constantinople, which failed on several occasions. Today, the term "Arabs" is often misused to refer to populations that have been Islamized, and as prescribed by Islam, no language other than Arabic can be used. As a result, the Romance languages of North Africa were suppressed, and it is not even admitted that modern Arabic contains Latin or Greek influences. Islamization occurred through military conquests, so what is the point of denying this reality? Then you describe an unreal history by saying that Christians were not persecuted. With the Ottoman conquests, there was a migratory flow of Christians fleeing to Europe for centuries. In Italy, there are Albanian and Greek communities. Under the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans, converted Christians were preferred because they were deemed more faithful than others. Just to understand, religious taxes were also used by the English against Catholics, with the aim of converting them to Anglicanism. So in Islam, there is another practice that doesn't seem very religious to me, that of having dozens of wives and hundreds of concubines. What's the point of forcing women to cover their bodies completely if those who govern Arab countries are icons of lust? So much so that Arab nobility is practically European because a good part of them were sons of coveted light-skinned slaves. Everywhere there is good and bad, the crusades were carried out for various reasons, and there were opportunists and those who acted out of faith. The jihād used by the Arabs, who were a minority, should be remembered, and the crusades are the same thing.
@AileDiablo You tell the story as they say in my parts, "to bring water to your own mill". The Arabs were a minority before Islam and the holy war, in which they conquered large portions of territory thanks to the power vacuum, but also because Persia, which you mentioned, was obsessed with the destruction of Constantinople, which they attacked continuously with allies, and always refused peace. The Romans were at war with others who also wanted to conquer the riches of Constantinople. So, are they really so bad for not being conquered? What a population of villains! When the Ottomans rushed with an army to help the residents after an earthquake, they found the walls intact. Imagine their disappointment! In your recent messages, you have said things that are completely biased and the result of indoctrination. It's no coincidence that Islam is a fundamentalist religion. Let's talk about ethnicities that are usually defined as Arabs, because with religion came the imposition of language. It should be said that the conquest was not by the Muslims, but was actually a coalition in which Christian kingdoms were allies. With the conquest of Persia, conversions were not favored, but rewards were offered to those who converted. Therefore, Persians were allowed to use their own language to encourage conversions. Then it was imposed on all occupied countries to use Arabic. In Syria, they no longer speak Greek, in North Africa there is no more Latin, and in Egypt there is no more Coptic. Moreover, for centuries they continued to press for expansion. In Sicily, after conquering a city, they had unarmed citizens killed in a horrible way just to terrorize the surrounding populations. They were mainly raiders, pirates, rapists, like the Vikings, in practice. If you find the term 'Crusade' offensive, it is clear that you do not understand its meaning. Its root is cross, for the cross, which basically indicates the same thing as Jihad, which is used today by Muslim terrorists to kill civilians. What I have described happened before the First Crusade. Mostly, the Arab conquest took place due to a series of fortunate coincidences, mainly rebellions that caused the weakening of the military garrison. Despite all the internal conflicts in Europe, in the end, Muslim rule was rejected, and in Palestine, before Israeli colonization, there were about 10% Christians for fear of further crusades. But this does not prove that there were no religious persecutions. Taxes were minimal, as I said, and were also used by the English against Catholics to force conversion. Public office was also forbidden. So, if I write something against religion, no one cuts off my head. Can you do the same? So what should we envy about those who are not free? Are the institutions of Arab nations presided over by righteous people or are they corrupt and thieving like other places? Religions promote principles, not flags or nationalism.
I consider myself reasonably well versed in history, but this view of the Crusades was completely new to me. Thanks _very_ much for putting this video together. I'll be checking out more of your work... 👍
Funnily enough, nothing that was said here is particularly controversial among the academics. It's just that they choose not to say some of it, and focus on the "correct" part of the truth. Well, they know who pays their bills, that's for sure.
@@Quincy_Morris what a bad modern idea, that we shouldn’t murder children and women over a belief system. Who have nothing to do with ur life and have done nothing to u. Ur genuinely a psychopath if u trying to justify mass violence in the name of a “peaceful god”
, if you truly read the history with evidence with no emotion you will all ways find crusaders to be no different from vikings and pirates they would kill rape and burn villages just in name of god , other hand muslims are way much nicer sure there war here and there but it was the norm back then , for those standards they would never harm to women children in at war they would show mercy at all cost, they use to give high living standards to slaves and prisoners , and rapes where al ways out of question unlike crusaders. though that doesn't make all the knights bad . there were genuene good ones for sure but every time they claimed some sort of holy war they ended up with intention to raid and distroy
Though I consider myself agnostic, I still massively respect Christianity and Catholicism and the awesome shit they did in the past, including the crusades
Un France the crusades are not seen as bad events, at the worst they are treated as “juste an other chain of religion war” and most teachers often talk about it as a essential part of our history
What does an "essential part of history" mean? That's a meaningless statement, like if Germany didn't invade France then it's history would be different, if Joan of Arc wasn't killed it wouldn't have the same history, but saying something is inherintly good because it's history is a bizzare take
@@SamSherr-Nelson you're right, "essential" is neutral here. However, the crusades (the first one at least) are seen as a predictable part of history and it was meant to happen at some point. And even are seen as a good thing in France to combat aggressive expansion in christian and controlled land, as franks were the majority of crusaders at first
Religion gets interpreted differently by everyone. Christianity was used to justify slavery as much as it was used to abolish it, just like Sharia law today is extremist in some places while lenient in others.
My country (Bulgaria) ceased to exist for 500 years under ottoman slavery. Ever since our liberation in 1878, contempt for arabs and muslims has been passed down from each generation. Our Turkish neighbors definitely have different morals now, but their ottoman ancestors are still in power. Westerners' blind hard-on for muslims is willfully ignorant.
If you are speaking your mother tongue and not Turkish, and if you are Christian and not Muslim, today that means you were under no assimilation nor slavery. The only thing that the Ottomans did to Christians, was tax them extra and had conscription during wars. Just like most countries today.
@@attilanation676Uh-huh, sure. I would advise you to look into all the massacres, that took place in my country, during the "ottoman occupation". Ottomans were entitled to everything Bulgarians owned, took Bulgarian children at an early age to recruit them as janissary, and punished any act of non-obedience with beatings, imprisonment, and death. I speak Bulgarian, however, 1/3 of our words are turkish. You want to turn a blind eye, it's up to you to be willfully ignorant.
@@petresko1041 they took 1 of 2 boys from a family. Yes I understand that this is horrible but you have to admit that the janissaries had a lot of say in politics and military of the Ottoman Empire, and they were all educated in many languages and I know that even alot of those janissaries became grand vezirs of the Ottoman Empire.
Thank you! I remember I was taught in school how evil were The Crusades and didn't know any better for years till I started to read about it a little and it all started to make sense.
@@kebman from my research, schools usally potray it as a "political" and "power" move. Both side were equally wrong, in my opinion. There was no evil or good it's just all black with blood stains everywhere.
It's easy to condemn the "find out" when you ignore the "fuck around" that preceded it...
Shakespearean quote.
Certified banger
reminds me of 9/11
There is no fuck around or find out - in reality is just people wanting to control Jerusalem, because by controling that city they could control their own people. And that's what religion is for - proxy control. You give people a belief in the afterlife and at some father savior and then you impose laws and regulations on them that they won't break or they will lose their "place" in heaven.
There was no f-k around, this video is straight half propaganda half historical falsehoods.
"Before the very first crusade was launched in 1095, Muslims had invaded the following Christian lands. They had invaded, Christian Syria, Christian Jordan, Christian Palestine, Christian Egypt, Christian Algeria, Christian Libya, Christian Morocco, Christian Portugal, Christian Spain, Christian France, Christian Sicily, Christian Turkey, Christian Armenia, Christian Italy. All before the first crusade. The crusades are a legitimate response to Islamic aggression, and Islamic violence. I don't need to hear any lectures about the crusades from people who support Islamic colonialism, Islamic imperialism, Islamic dominion, and arabization." - Bob from Speakers Corner
Have you ever read about right of conquest, if you are not able to defend a land it is not yours.(you dumbos this was abolished way before ww1 so plz dont ask that again that is this valid for palestine)
@@imranshaikh6314 The Eastern Roman Empire was great in size. They would've defended themselves no problem from the early Muslim conquests, had they not just ended a costly war with the Sasanians during that time. They were in financial strain and manpower, and on top of that, rebellions in Africa weren't helping the situation. Muslims had no right to invade the Christian lands, and the crusades are entirely justified. Islam is a faulty religion, founded by a man who had raped a 9 year old child, and the only reason on why so many Muslims exist is because of the force conversion of the early innocent Christians.
@@imranshaikh6314The Eastern Roman Empire was great in size. They would've defended themselves no problem from the early Muslim conquests, had they not just ended a costly war with the Sasanians during that time. They were in financial strain and manpower, and on top of that, rebellions in Africa weren't helping the situation. Muslims had no right to invade the Christian lands, and the crusades are entirely justified. Islam is a faulty religion, founded by a man who had raped a 9 year old child, and the only reason on why so many Muslims exist is because of the force conversion of the early innocent Christians.
@@imranshaikh6314 @imranshaikh6314 The Eastern Roman Empire was great in size. They would've defended themselves no problem from the early Muslim conquests, had they not just ended a costly war with the Sasanians during that time. They were in financial strain and manpower, and on top of that, rebellions in Africa weren't helping the situation. Muslims had no right to invade the Christian lands, and the crusades are entirely justified. Islam is a faulty religion, founded by a man who had r-ped a 9 year old child, and the only reason on why so many Muslims exist is because of the force conversion of the early innocent Christians.
@@imranshaikh6314The Eastern Roman Empire was great in size. They would've defended themselves no problem from the early Muslim conquests, had they not just ended a costly war with the Sasanians during that time. They were in financial strain and manpower, and on top of that, rebellions in Africa weren't helping the situation. Muslims had no right to invade the Christian lands, and the crusades are entirely justified. Islam is a faulty religion, founded by a man who had raped a 9 year old child, and the only reason on why so many Muslims exist is because of the force conversion of the early innocent Christians.
France Germany and England getting along? Yea shit got real...
Well the King of England and the King of France where having an affair so there is that.
Poland and Russia getting along in 1684? Yea shit got real...
Religious fanatcism brings people together
@@EthelredHardrede-nz8yv Well, they were not two seperate kingdoms. It was very complicated at that time. Basically the normandy duchy conquered england while still being a vassal of france. We have to stop looking at it through a modern lense. We now know that they were never going to be reunited - but at that time it was very complicated.
Richard the lionheart was literally imprisoned by the "germans" when he was caught on his way back from the crusade. I like how this youtube video literally blames oversimplification in the first few videos and everyone literally goes ahead and oversimplifies everything - like the "barbarians" conquering western rome.
I legit had a World History Class that taught us both sides and still called the Muslims the good guys.
There were no good side imo
@@decimalauto read history about any war, and there will be good and evil. If The Muslims didn't kick Jews and Christians out of the Holy Land for no reason, the Crusades would have never happened
@@decimalautoWould you rather live in Europe or the Middle East?
@jasper_42678 Europe without a doubt. The Muslim culture was and still is evil
Never forget the literal traitors who tell you these lies.
Calling the Crusades an unprovoked attack on Muslim territory is like calling D Day an unprovoked attack on German territory. I can understand saying that it was sad that it ever became necessary, but it's not shameful to fight for survival or to regain what was taken.
HUH
DEUS VULT
Yeah more like butchering entire cities and taking the women and childern and taking everything they have in the name of ur god
Have you watched Europa the last battle? Xd
Insane comparison. It would be more like justifying Denmark invading Scania today because it used to be danish until 1658. The islamic world had not just captured Jerusalem four years before the crusades, you are either stupid or dishonest
I had to write a report on the crusades my sophomore year. I pretty much said what you’re saying here, and the teacher gave me a zero. She also threatened to fail me for the year because I defined Jihad as a holy war, even though I asked an actual practicing Muslim about the Islamic definition. This was 2014, I can only imagine how much history has been further bastardized since then
Jihad means struggle, could be used in a context of holy war. But the Def is struggle, lets not be foolish here.
@@Pax-Islamica There are several different types of Jihad, and the "smaller jihad" which refers to holy war is MANDATORY for all Muslims who are able to do so as COMMANDED BY THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD. Stop doing dishonest Taqiyyah.
@@the_kimchi_kommandant2603 Where is that verse? Taqiyyah is not a concept Islam, it was invented by anti-Islam activists to silent Muslims. Engage in honest discussion instead of throwing terms that are the opposite of that,
@@Pax-Islamica Bro??? Now you're denying a fundamental part of your own religion??? wtf
@@the_kimchi_kommandant2603 How is taqiyya part of the religion? Give me authentic hadith or quranic verses to substantiate your claims.
The Crusades are a classic case of the kid who gets continuously bullied finally fighting back against his bully, but then he's the one to get in trouble for fighting back instead of the bully who started it.
Yeah but you guys have killed so much innocent people women kids.... But othmans was just fighting the army if the conquest a contry they don't a massacre like you guys do Christianity is a bloody religion
that makes no sense? land is land, and at this time it changed hands like a dollar bill. actually, till the 20th century, it changed hands thousands of times from hundreds of rulers in the span of decades. were they responding to the sultanate of rum's raids into byzantine cities? that's the only thing i can think of. the emirate of cordoba was far past expansion, the arab mamluks were sitting through their golden age, maybe taking a few slaves from sudan or something, but nothing really serious.
@@adamelghalmi9771 u just said alot without saying anything stay mad classic christian W
Facts
And how did the Christians got it in the first place 🤔
Funny how atheist only ever go after Christians and not the other two Abrahamic religions. You know, those other two. The one that kills you for criticizing it and the other one we’re not allowed to talk about.
Small hats
Underrated comment
yeah these ppl need victims without lobby, same reason ppl hate on nazis while them are not even at life anymore
For the most part Muslims are to. Busy attacking and defending with Christianity to bother with atheists. Atheists you encounter are from “Christian” countries so that is what they are usually speaking out against. If we were in a Muslim country then the resistance would be more Islamic focused. Atheists have the luxury to stand on the side lines shaking their heads at the gross and murderous nature of both arms of the abrahamic fairy tale and wish for better.
This is why I came back to THE faith.
Our Abrahamic brothers are at each other's throats. Very soon a new Crusade will begin and it will not be pretty, for the God-slayers and Divinity Deniers.
I love how everyone calls the crusades "bad" while blatantly ignoring what caused them in the first place
Hmm what else was like that in the 20th century
@@smokesandalloy9487 "gradually I began to hate them..."
Not "everyone". Just the societal rats.
@@smokesandalloy9487 I'm ignorant. What are you referring to?
@@theoneandonlybridge4210
Certain movements in late 1930s europe that wanted to avoid a certain fate modernism was leading europe into that is massively and purposely misunderstood by academics because even tho they had flaws, they were mostly right and sadly in 1945 they lost.
I like how the christians are always condemned yet somehow the islam atrocities are consistently ignored...
True story!
Islamic aggression is not only against Christian. It is against all humanity
Same with Jewish atrocities, they were always blamed on the Italians or the Russians... For their most recent atrocities the Syrians and Afghans and Iraqis get the blame
Convenient to the narrative.
As well as the Gaza genocide.
As an atheist who has a great appreciation for learning history I’ve also been baffled by how often the crusades are portrayed as some unique evil among historical wars. Completely just ignoring the defensive nature of them and how Islamic expansion both pre and post dated them all
It's utter necessary in history learning to look at the past with the eyes of the past, not the eyes of the present. You can't just segregate few events of history and decide what was right and what was wrong according to your conteporary society values. It's less than appropriate and narrows down your insight over the course of events and facts.
any man saying that the muslims are the rightful owners of the holy land is an complete clueless idiot. aswell to any other religion other then the jews. king david built the place.
@adi_lowenthal_platt Oh for sure, that is why I emphasized 'portrayed as some unique evil' as in it and most wars of similar nature or around that time are evil in our retrospective morality.
Atheists have a unique hatred against Christians. Especially in the West, where they are seen as political/ideological enemies, as well as relics of a "shameful" past.
@adi_lowenthal_platt every war in history untill ww1 had war crimes because it was normal and allowed. And i agree with that ideology because u cant win a war by just killing off an army and leaving the enemy population in the area, it Couse instability and doesn't change the place just the leadership.
Whether you’re a believer or not, I think we can all agree that the crusades prevented a tyrannical islamic world.
islamic maybe, but islam was somewhat nicer to its ppl compared to how european princes treated their peasants.
But i dunno if islamic rulers will treat europe with the same tolerance if they conquered it.
However considering their track record of treating christians in their domain (e.g. a tax for believing in christianity and barely anything else)
plus only the first crusade did achieve anything, the other crusades where basically looting fellow christians.
@@杨江辞 most scientific advances came from Christians and if Europe came under islamic occupation we would have regressed back to the stone age.
Remind us which religion did the imperial europe belong to? Which imposed slavery, exploitation, and plunder of Africa, America, Asia?
If islam took over Europe someone like Marthin Luther would still destroy the religion and secularize the world. Don't forget that reinessance and reform weren't a result of western culture, they were a result of technological advancements and Islam wouldn't be able to hold on just like Christianity
Ottoman Empire
I am from Mexico, not many know that we are the second country with the most Catholics in the world and we have been taught that the crusades were good since they prevented the expansion of Islam in Europe. I do not understand why in many European countries they talk about the crusades as something bad since it was to protect the European continent and the Christians
White liberals think that the catholic and traditionalistic Hispanics are somehow on their side and super pro lgbtqp+ and also hate God and their parents lmao.
Probably cuz they smashed/ tortured all the guys balls?
Reason is:the rise of leftist, esp.communist ideology in Europe in the nineteenth century. Communist and socialist philosophers needed to portray the past of Europe in the worst way possible bc they advertised their ideology as something "new" and "better" and saw the Church as a rival.
if that's true why didn't they do the first crusade in hispania then? a place where there were actual european christians in actual peril?
why did they randomly loot and raze constantinople, and rape and burn their own fellow christians in the byzantine empire?
The leftists in Europe are hellbent on destroying our culture, religion. They are brainwashed by secularists and a love of islam. The least democratic, most destructive religion of all. I can’t understand this suicide.
Can't even imagine what a crazy undertaking this was for the soldiers, after that notorious travel distance to fight an unknown enemy for months.
they did it for the Lord
@@1992zorro I'm an atheist, but it amazes me what strenght humans can gain if they just believe in something, hope can move mountains i guess.
the French/Frankish name for the Holy Land was 'Outre mer' - simply 'overseas', so unknown it was
@@spyderman4206what interests lol. The interest wad to help Byzantium face the Seljuks, but the crusaders when advancing to Anatolia and the levant felt like Emperor Alexios did not help them enough, so the counts took the lands for themselves
They were promised gold, to have their sins forgiven and to enter heaven (from the trusty, wholesome, Vatican). But they had fun murdering, looting and raping along the way. Proper gentlemen the crusaders. God bless 'em.
As a french, I'm always surprised by the way the Crusades are viewed by the anglo-saxon public. I've never heard something as "The Crusade were aggression" or "a terrible crime". It was an adventure, driven by faith, and which gave rise to exchanges more than a simple fight between enemy religions. The Middle East being at the time one very diverse region, in its cultural and religious mix.
Also, it should not be forgotten that, at the time of the Crusaders, the Middle East was a Christian land only a few centuries ago. Islam having only appeared in the 7th century and the first crusade taking place at the beginning of the 11th century
Ive learned one important thing from you french people:
Between us europeans you are either the most cucked or the most based. Theres no in between.
The 4th crusade should not have happened however, the Roman’s were Christian
@@jeffbob3311 BIG mistakes were made. I suppose that back then they were corrupted by greed
Stylé ta photo de profil
@@SIGNOR-G Mistakes like the sacking and massacre of Jerusalem and Antioch during the First crusade, huh? That little mistake that was the sacking of Constantinople led to Ottomans' conquest, and also opened a beachhead that the Turks used to conquer the rest of Eastern Europe, they even reached Vienna in 1529! Crusaders were nut f*cks, most of them were nobility's sons who couldn't inherit and wanted to take a big chunk of land for themselves or crazy maniacs like Raynald of Chatillon, thanks to their greedy asses the Romans finally fell
I was woke until I converted to Catholic. Thank God I love Catholic faith, I learned so much in my faith.
The more the left wing brain washing has grown, the stronger my Christian faith has grown. We need a rock of love, equality and peace to fight against the identity politics and totalitarian class systems instigated by neo-Marxism.
That’s interesting, challenges my viewpoint that wokes are intelligent but just for the wrong causes. Thanks for the insight!
Then you became awful even more
As an Romanian I can say that our history books appreciate the crusades , especially the late ones that we participated in like Varna , because the Ottomans have been a constant threat to us until the 19th century
romani people are literally Turks that call them selves "gypsy"
Romania was the shield of Europe for centuries
Turkey still are. Romania is the most direct remnants of Byzantium. Turkey is one of the most provocative countries in the world. they are why the US got involved with Saddam Hussein. They didn't have to destablize iraqs water, but they chose to because they are the wrong type of muslim to each other. Hussein always promised that if Turkey built the dams, he would blow them up. Years later after Saddam is deposed, Turkey builds the dams and cause more havoc to all the downstream countries. From Syria to Iraq. Look how those have become hotbeds now that their water has destabilized. Turkey knew the play it was doing.
@@corpseoperaNow, sadly Ucraine is the shield of Europe.
As a Bulgarian I also appreciate the crusades given how much we and the rest of the Balkans suffered under Ottoman rule.
The issue I see many modern zoomers have is the notion that the Crusades were all failures other than the First Crusade. This misconception comes from the fact that the other Crusades were unable to retake the city of Jerusalem. But to be honest most modern historians over simplify the retaking of Jerusalem as the only true goal of the Crusades. Most Crusades actually didn’t even have this goal in mind. Looking beyond the recapture of Jerusalem the Crusades actually did yield some incredible results. The Northern Crusades and Reconquista were completely successful in the long term. The Third Crusade led to the capture of Cyprus, Tyre, and Jaffa. Richard Lionheart beat Saladin in all 3 of the major battles fought against one another, despite being outnumbered. This led to a Crusader military victory where Saladin was forced to be chill with Christians and was unable to expand further into the other Crusader states. Also the Sixth Crusade actually led to direct Christian control of Jerusalem once again. Really the Crusades have become a subject of historical misunderstanding and deliberate misleading by modern cut throat ideologues.
It's because Christianity is an easy punching bag that can't, and won't fight back. Can't expect much from intellectually bankrupted cowards.
The issue is the same as the issue has been back then, the enemies of Christ are attacking us, or who owns the holy land now?
The people that killed Christ?
cough 4th crusade cough
@@ejoji4245 in the case of the original intent of the crusades to alleviate the eastern romans every crusade fails and yes the fourth crusade the most. Yet, in their own rights and intentions even the fourth crusade was a success..
@@simonst7645 the fourth crusade made way for the rising ottomans what are you on about? it wasnt successful in defending christendom or retaking land, it made way for a islamic empire to rise are you kidding?
Why "Sir" Ridley Scott deserves a black eye instead of knighthood for misrepresenting both Christianity and history.
christian cry baby 🤣
In the Philippines, we studied the Crusades as a positive thing in schools. I was surprised that we view this history very different from Western standpoint.
This idea as a bad thing is relatively new... say within a few years.
Do you know why the Philippines is named as it is ?
@@stargategoku there was no Islamic expansion in east Asia and never an army from the Islamic caliphate set foot in it but Islam spread by the Yemenies traders and the people actually liked it not like the Christian who sended armys and colonised it by "force"
@@stargategoku the fall of the Islamic rule of andalusia because of the Muslims frist but what the Christian did to both Jews and Muslims citizens by the inquisition of torture inside dungeons
@@stargategoku moon god?! What is your argument don't give random ayat and you don't know there context
Here in germany the crusades are not seen as a pointless aggression. The crusades were an answer to the spread of islam and that is how it is taught in school here. I was pretty surprised by the man in the intro saying the cursades where the most shameful undertaking of human history. A statement which i would consider to be ridiculous and false. The conquests of the mongols were much worse for example. People today also tend to forget that we speak of times so vastly different to our own that we can't even attempt to understand how it was for people back in the middle ages. Everyone was a fanatical believer.
And then...you open the floodgates to Islam. Smart.
I'm actually scared to open modern textbooks with how things have been going in western Europe as of late.
History is being recontextualized and altered in no small part due to the demographics changing.
Which is concerning, considering history should always be objective.
American media, especially school material portrays the crusades as disgusting wars
@@Volvith Sadly you are absolutely right. What's happeing is very concerning.
and why are they killing Jews not Muslim then? a tradition before Nazi?
Don't know why the crusades are portrayed as something bad in other countries but in my country(btw, I'm from Armenia) the crusades are portrayed as fight for the sake of Christians and Christianity and at the same time, nothing bad was written about muslims. It is an unbelievable honor to be a Christian due to the fact, that my country first accepted Christianity as a state religion and due to what my nation and my ancestors had to go through to remain as a Christian country. Love to everyone and stay safe out there. Carry on the legacy of your ancestors ❤️
Because, dear friend and brother in Christ, your country hasn't succumbed to the enemy of tradition and Christianity that is liberal laicism. The same cannot be said about my home country Spain, even if there are some like us who hold out. Hopefully we can revert this decay and restore our great Faith again. † ❤
@@nestor1907 God bless you, your family, your nation, and your country ❤️
Western countries have a lot of socio-political snakes trying to rewrite history and shame parts of our past. It’s infuriating
That's cause the context of Armenia, Georgia, and even the Byzantine Empire is completely ignored in most western documentaries and movies on the events of the crusades, they kind of just put it as if catholics were simply bored of fighting each other and wanted to convert the whole world to christianity. I think in western culture and media, the crusades and colonialism are very much blended into one another, to create this appalling view of events, that Europeans have always been blood thirsty, racist group of people, that only seek to conquer. Which is very much not the case, since most of European history is actually about national stability.
@jackjones4824 I just want to understand your view on the umayyad caliphate and the Islamic crusades and their conquest and killings over thousands of innocent Cristians, Jews, and Zoroastrians? Also western Europe had just a much a claim to revenge as the Bzyantine Empire, the Islamic Crusades pushed well into Spain and Southern France, completing conquering the visigoths and the pieces of Frankish kingdom(both of which germanic tribes who had been converted to Christian). Also, let's not act like Islamic crusades needed to happen, or were somehow provoked, the Romes never pushed for control Arabian Dessert
The Crusades saved what we know as Europe today
we as ry atians may need to rise again to save the west from islmisation
An inbred cesspool?
Jesus left the comment section......
based
Europe has fallen lol
The recently converted vikings went on a crusade in 1100. king sigurd the first was the first king to personally join a crusade and not a single battle was lost during his travels
Just say norse please 😭
"Recently" lol by the 1000's a lot of them were already Christian even in Scandinavia. Even more-so in Normandy earlier where it barely took a generation.
My ancestors moved to Normandy, France from Denmark. At that point they ceased to be Vikings Normans (Normanni, Latin) settled in the upper north of France and the area became known as Normandy. Their king, Rollo became a vassal to the French king. They became fiercely Catholic and the popes employed them against infidels. Charles Martel fought with the Muslims and forced them out of France in a battle at Toulouse. They also went to Sicily and basically chased the Greek Orthodox Church out.
why is that a surprise? scandinavia was converted by the sword, the ones that weren't executed or took up the sword against their kin would naturally be drawn to this. the crusades within europe were however more barbaric than the ones in the levant
@bennyklabarpan7002 it was actually kings that convinced their people to convert. i mean, hell, sweyn folk beard converted, and he still acted like a pagan while the rest of his subjects were christian as missionaries came from Germany and started slowly converting to Christianity until they were all Christian so sweyn folk beard decided to convert as his people didn't like his pagan beliefs
The Austrian flag has its origins in the Third Crusade (1189-1192).
The Babenberger Leopold V was an Austrian duke. It is said that after the siege and subsequent battle of Akkon, his white robe was completely soaked in blood, save for a white stripe where he wore his sword belt. In 1191, Heinrich VI gave Leopold the red-white-red coat of arms. After the Babenbergs died out, the Habsburgs inherited the coat of arms and it became the colors of the House of Austria.
It's one of the oldest, still in use, flags.
The Austrians started ww1
@@Kazamatigoh1221who cares?
@@Kazamatigoh1221Serbia started WW1
@@MicahDAmato a quick search on google will tell you Austria was the ones who declared war. They were also on the German side aka the BAD side, aka the villains.
@@Kazamatigoh1221 good bait man you had me goin there for a second🤣
As Assyrian Christian I just find the modern view of Christianity in general weird they suggested that the Christian faith has notions or attitudes that are openly hostile which they never do to any other faith especially those the modernist openly counter such as Islam
There’s countless attacks against the Muslim faith, so I don’t know what you’re talking about.
@@Handle0108 Were being played against each other
@@Handle0108 the Christians are expected to accept and tolerate the social decay and lgbt stuff that they don’t put on muslims as they are instead exotise them at the moment
@@assyrianchristian764 that is the fault of Christians for being weak and not Muslims or the media. If you tolerate everything people will keep demanding and pushing more on you, and unfortunately nowadays Christians are not willing to stand up for their values. Muslims on the other hand stand by and defend every letter of their holy book and religion.
@@assyrianchristian764 as a muslim it is quite sad to see the state of affair of religion in the modern day.
Alot of Christians cater to easily to athiesm and secularism as it slowly eats away at the very core beliefs of Christianity.
Nowadays it's getting hard to even tell what exactly a Christian is when so much of the religion is being changed.
Some Christians think saving the faith means joining Christian fundamentalists organizations and spreading hate to other religions and all this does is push Christianity into a political ideology.
The reason why islam is so successful right now is due to how robust it is, the people are both tolerant yet Intolerant, A perfect blend.
I feel as though for Christianity to truly be saved in this era they must return to the source.
Practice Christianity the way the early Christians did at the time of Jesus, bring back the old methods of praying, bring back the headscarf, bring back The old ways to better battle this culture war.
Other wise I don't see Christianity surviving against this future, liberal, secular, Lgbt future that will eventually reach every home.
Amazing to see someone have the courage to make this video. Well done, sir.
Our European history has been so lied about when it comes to dealing with non-Europeans that its not an accident.
Colonialism was on purpose
@@bmoney3837 Yes, a misguided world view that we needed to take all our innovations and our God to the rest of the world.
@@BravoCharlie2uthrough conquest and exploitation?
@@bmoney3837and it made the world better bringing civilization to all corners of the world
I'm from South Africa and am glad it seems like we were taught an accurate portrayal of this topic
"It took Christianity 300 years of being put to the sword by Islam, having 2/3 of the Christian world conquered - with millions butchered, and over a million more Europeans carted off across the Mediterranean into slavery before the first crusade was called."
True no wonder y many ignore this
you know christianity also spread enourmously
@@Spacebartreal they spread through largely peaceful means at that point, Egypt, Anatolia, North Africa, Iberia, Syria, Ethiopia, Armenia, modern Jerusalem and Palestine where converted through peaceful means. they where the spiritual guides the general populace liked and kings liked how effective their administration assistance could be. only the Balkans and germanic/skandinavian raiders where converted at sword point.
@@bmetalfish3928 What about the native americans , massacre of the aboriginals of australia and natives of newzealand. Christianity also spread through colonisation, look at south america. This video is extremely biased as it ignores the massacres christians have committed during that era and later on. Anyway Religion has died not only in europe but globally, the adoption of secularism has been completed worldwide and the masses have left their religious beliefs for a secular and more free lifestyle. You and i both know this is true and its time we all accept what society has become, irreligious and secular
@@bmetalfish392810 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.[12] -Deuteronomy 20:10-14
To add further context, Mohammed himself had planned to attack Byzantium, but died in 632 before he was able to get there. The first siege of Constantinople began 42 years later in 674. By the time of the first Crusade in 1095, Muslim armies had been attacking the West for over 400 years before the European powers decided to counter attack. I think almost half a millennium of aggression is more than enough justification to take the fight to the enemy. The Europeans were definitely not the aggressors in this situation.
The crusade of Levant was actually a waste of time had they retaking Anatolia for the Byzantine or Egypt I think the crusade would last for long the levant is open bored hell hole the saljik . Ayoubid kurds abbasid fatimed it just hell
The Muslim-Byzantine relations became worse after the Ghassanids had killed the Prophet’s (PBUH) ambassadors which led to the first skirmish between the Muslims and the Byzantines in Mu’tah, 629 CE
@@grimmy7481 wait u sure isn't persia did this ?
I have been saying this for literally my whole life. By taking the 'Holy Land' back from the Muslims most Islamic military effort was focused on regaining it rather than attacking Christendom around the Mediterranean or through the Balkans. The almost 200 years gained (1099-1291) was crucial in enabling Europe to survive.
@@tvbopc5416survive what? muslim spain was around for centuries. how many wars did they have with the rest of europe?
founders of oxford studied there for crying out loud, stop painting an apocalypitic threat as if there was total war and christians were killed on sight
I'm no expert in history, Islam, Christianity, or much of anything. BUT I do know that my school system taught us about the Crusades, but never even so much as mentioned the Islamic Conquests. I think there is something seriously wrong with that. If we are gonna talk history, let's talk all of it, not just selective portions.
It what made me hate World History overall because they kept skipping important events. This is why I love the fact I went to seek my own understanding of history and told myself why didn’t they tell me about this in school?
If You are from the West, You’ll be educated in Western history that’s deemed relevant to You. There is a reason the Crusades have been part of Western educational curriculum for centuries. Don’t forget, the majority of the Western World were still practicing Christians up into the 20th century and the narrative most of Us were taught about the Crusades, was only that of pilgrimage and liberation. Only, that’s not entirely true. Funnily enough, the Muslim conquests into Europe aren’t interpreted w/in the Islamic World as being necessarily positive, particularly after the first Crusade.
Comparing how Our cultures interpret these events is both surprising and interesting. However, if You’re truly interested in learning about this part of history, watching Videos like the one We’re commenting on, is definitely not the place to start. I’d recommend learning about the religions and their denominations to begin with, that’ll give You a better understanding of things. ‘Usefulcharts’ & ‘Let’s talk Religion’ channels are good, credible and tangible sources of information on this topic.
The Crusades are basically the geo-political equivalent of "Mom, Timmy hit me back".
Looking up human evolution & migration of Europe and archaeology and then the mythology of each civilisation. Huge ass pieces of history have never been taught in schools.
All of it? Extremely impractical.
When I was reading a book about the Crusades, I forget which book, but the telling of the 1st Crusade always made me giggle. "Things were going bad but then the Franks got really mad and the day was won."
Might happen again, given the way events are unfolding nowadays 😂
Another win for the Franks!!! Losing 1 war against the most advanced army of the time with some of the greatest soldiers of all time and being remembered for only that sucks. Franks have had many great battle victories. That story is funny. So remember, when they're pissed, fighting is not good!
NEVER I remind you; NEVER... anger the Frank's... Worst mistake of my life
- some ottoman guy probably
franks can kiss myy arrsse@@littlehollow
@@maitres-chez-nous5609the crusader were also many germans and the Franks are also a germanic tribe this is not a french victory but a european.
Never ask:
A woman her age
A man his salary
An anti-imperialist leftist activist what they think about the Umayyad Empire
Crusades killed many Jews that believe in Yeshua (Jesus). I don`t know if you know, but all of you will respond for these actions, because you also support it.
@@Bolawayjews believed in jesus?
Its true, under most muslim empires people of the book were protected.
Why? They like it?
No need to ask them, they dont know what that is anyways
your conclusions regarding our historical past.....are refreshingly rich in truth .....I believe....good work again!!! Though be careful that you don't become a simple pendulum of opinion
A thousand years later, not much has changed…
no today we're just saying "hey destroy our civilzation! Welcome!"
@danzeband1498
It's likely something similar happened back then, with local infighting and stupidity like now.
The Christian way of turning the other cheek is sometimes good in terms of showing impulse control and a belief in civility and order.
It's bad because it takes longer to provoke necessary retaliation. This time many will have to rediscover Christ and Jesus as well.
Actually a lot has changed now… for the worse. In europe now there are millions of muslims, they are not even europeans by heritage, and they don’t shy about making Europe dominated by Islam.
5th crusade incoming don't worry
Still fighting for the holy land
The crusades should actually viewed as an amazing uniting conflict where many nations came together under a common cause to achieve something
...that failed
@@williamrobert9898 you didn’t watch the video huh
@@heyo1515 you think a random video will alter the reality that they failed huh?
@@williamrobert9898 🤣 LOL. Please let the butthurt Christians of this comment section live in a fantasy land where they think killing women and children and raping those who are left was a good thing. It’s funny to watch
@@heyo1515 They failed and crippled the Byzantines even more instead of helping them. (4th Crusade)
Fun fact: A Norwegian King was the first European king to personally lead his forces into the Holy Land.
Which king?
@@BjornerokkKing Sigurd I
He was just a teenager. He was valiant and successful and made it home, but lost his mind tragically.
@@Deep.Dungeon2e he was a great king but his death caused a 110 year long civil war in norway
no one in the world needs judastyanity
Should be shared by everyone on all the platforms that they are on! Make it go viral!
Kingdom of Heaven is not an accurate depiction of the crusades, but its still a damn good movie.
The Director's Cut is better than the theatrical version. Fixes many issues.
@@mercenaryknight5419 I only saw the director's cut and was surprised reading afterwards how much of the movie was actually true. The most important faults I guess are Saladin and his army being more mild than reality, some of the important Crusaders being made the clear antagonists, and the details around Balian being changed to ease the watcher into the Eastern world.
Kingdom of Psychopaths, this would be a good title.
Bailan's life story is ripe for a Kingdom of Heaven 2 story someday, but it will never be made.
Very true and my history teacher used it to show how nice Muslims wete and the Crusaders were wrong... now I see it's lie
I'm not even Christian, and this video still spoke to me. Love this video!
Your LDS?
LDS are Christians though, just not Nicene Christians
@@pjthehomelessmage i know, but he had a beehive that resembled the Utah Flag one, so i was asking.
@@Hibblesonk My profile picture is the cropped flag of Utah because it's my favourite flag
@@pjthehomelessmage gnostic occultists are christians too i guess
Forget this all, I want a crusader armor set of my own.
Me too
I agree too. 😊
I think there’s a sport in north America that does just that.
U get blunt weapons, real armors, and go crazy on a 1v1 or something up to 8v8.
Childhood come to life.
I literally wanted to sign up even before the video but now I definitely wished I could have fought to protect the holy land
@@HadiAnimations it's a medieval MMA place yea?
As a 'non white christian,' i consider the crusades to be ridiculous european shenanigans that have nothing to do with christianity, I personnally don't refer or think of any of this stuff as having to do with christianity, christianity is about jesus christ, not about your race or country, or hating musims and jews
Thank you pax, as a Coptic Christian, I’m glad some one is talking input our history of persecution and all other Middle Eastern Christians. God bless
@@al-muwaffaq341 the Muslims were far worse. That’s like asking a Jewish person, would you rather live in Nazi Germany, or Rome? Of course I’m choosing Rome, even if they did suppress the Jews they weren’t nearly THAT bad in comparison!
You're funny bruh, coptic sect is the most prosecuted group before islam exist
@@nooneknowsidc literally before the Arabs conquered Egypt the Byzantines literally persecuted them and any other denomination of Christianity that wasn’t Orthodox. That’s why these people submitted and joined the Arabs.
haha, just remind me why did the Coptic betray the Byzantine multiple times..?
is it because they were persecuted?
The coptic and the semites were persecuted for racial and rhetoric beliefs wasn't it..?
Do you remember what happened to the pagan coptics by the romans and the christian coptics..?
@@al-muwaffaq341 Catholics that killed orthodox/copts or force-converted them were excommunicated from the church later on
Puzzling to me is the people that attack the crusades but are oddly silent on the forced expansion of Islam.
حسنا نحن للطيفين مع الاسرى
"Forced".... Okay... LOL
@@Thanatos6 yes forced you are considered a second class citizen if your not Islamic in Islamic countries assuming they don't just kill you if your gay
islamd did bad stuff,therefore christianity can do 10 times worse?flawless logic adolf
The irresponsible manner in which the Byzantines governed the Levant and Egypt definitely hastened the expansion of Islam.
Thanks for the video. As an Arab Christian, of course, they never show this side of history and during school, the Crusaders were often described as barbaric, while the Muslims of course are merciful. I wish we could all learn pure history with no biases.
you know that the crusaders killed even the Christians amongst the muslims? no ?
(Ignore my arab name, I'm syrio-brazilian) Wait, do you mean in what country? Because with so much communist revisionism, I'm almost sure western education pictures crusaders much worse than muslim world education.
obviously.. im sure the brits know next to nothing about their own cruel colonial history.
The ayyubis were indeed more merciful by the standard of their time. Saladin was remembered in europe and earned limbo in dante poems. His descendants were also more inclined to be merciful to subsequent crusading knights. In history there are no black and white. The past is packed full of diverse characters each deserving more than the stereotypical images which we project onto them.
Funny how the Christians were so kind to the people of the Americas, the people of the North Caucasus when the Teutonic Knights went on gruesome crusades to eradicate paganism. What mercy was that? When did Muslims ever treat you Christian Arabs badly? On the contrary, those crusaders killed Orthodox Christians indiscriminately during the First Crusade. This is the kind of rule you wanted to live under?
Informative video. Thank you for producing it!👍🏼
From what I experienced, most Americans and Canadians think the crusades were terrible and have no idea what has happened prior to the crusades.
Modern education is a cesspool
You mean like the romans invading the Middle East? And North Africa or the Greeks before them or the Persians before them?
Most other Americans could not point out where the holy land is on a map so their foolish opinions dont matter in the slightest
@@charsikhan9753 none of those were holy wars, nor were they the cause of brutal islamic conquest.
@@connr8691 Not every Islamic conquest was a holy war either. Gullible commoners like you were stoked into a frenzy against “foreign” peoples throughout the ages. Rome did it, the Greeks did it, the British empire did it, the United does it. And what does it matter what the cause of conquest was? Whether political, economic, or religious in nature, conquest is conquest. Islamic conquests we’re generally benign to the natives, in comparison to western conquests in the east.
As for the “cause” of the initial conquests. You may want to fine tune your history knowledge. Both the Byzantine empire (what was left of rome) and the Persians had Arab lands and Arab vassals under their thumb. What you call the initials”Islamic” conquests are in fact Arab reconquests of their own territory.
Imagine enduring centuries of Jihad and then people going "yeah the crusades? especially evil time in human history... imagine fighting people over religion."
I can almost imagine the faces of the crusaders both confused and angry in equal measure at the sheer ignorance of modern europeans on this matter
Imagine justifying being deranged scum with the existence of other deranged scum.
Christian's. Know most crusades were declared against other Christian's, right?
The video cherry picks the first few, but whether you're talking about Cathars in southern France or pagans in the Baltic, most crusades were either declared against groups not a threat to Christian lands or against fellow Christians.
@@danielporisch2676you mean the same cathars who where making ritual suicide?
Well crusades are waste literally also I know Christianty and Islam I mean Muslim ended after ottoman defeated byantizine the capital Constantine which ended it also why don't the guy mention the peace between sallhuddin and Baldwin also he hates Islam ofcourse he made this to justify crusades Templars killed all Muslims in Jerusalem I wish you respect brother I don't meant hate just explain he hates islam for jihad and terrorist
@@thefool1086 literally no written records exist of the Cathars themselves so, just like rumors of witchcraft in Salem, we should take any authirs possible motivation into account for context.
What we do know is that Langedouc had enjoyed more autonomy from the French crown before the Albegensian crusade and afterward was forced militarily to submit to the French crown, a major victory for the expansion of the French crown. A coincidence, then, that an Gnostic religion first recorded in Eastern Europe would have such a wellspring in southern France as to require a crusade....
Ive often wondered how things wouldve been different during the third crusade if barbarossa hadnt died and the french hadnt abandoned richard the lionheart. Its amazing he had any success on his own against saladin
The Lionheart truly earned his name and was a true Champion of The Faith.
You're thinking of the third crusade, not the second.
@@anonnymousperson oops thanks i got my crusades mixed up lol
I only recognize these names thanks to Age of Empires 2 xD
The Lionheart NEVER lost a battle to Saldin...
First time I'm actually proud to be a Catholic. Thank you.
One small addendum: Christianity had spread to east Africa early like 50ad, and the kingdoms east and south of Egypt adopted Christianity as their official region about 100 before it became the official religion of the Roman Empire in the 320’s. They’re some of the oldest churches are in that region. But it is slightly different branch than became Catholicism.
Alot of people believe that ethiopia may have predated armenia as the first christian country very cool
People also forget about the many Christians that existed on the eastern side of the middle east and into Asia. Maybe not majorities or countries defined by Christianity, but they were there.
नमस्कार, क्या आपके दांत साफ होना संभव है? आप किन तरीकों का इस्तेमाल करते हैं?
We should also mention that in Rome there was a strong opposition and, even though the faithful had to go underground for many years, Christianity was there. When Christianity was officialised by the local states is not really relevant.
Both St. Paul and St. Peter went to Rome where they were both killed in 67ad. Peter had the authority given by Jesus to found His Church.
They broke off from orthodoxy after the council of Ephesus
I remember my history teacher in high school very much pushed this idea about the crusades. he even lamented the fact that charles martel stopped the muslims from entering europe because that would have stopped europe from entering the dark ages. And then taking history in university I've pretty much learned the complete opposite when it comes to medieval history
Muslims attacked the west, then played the victim once the west responded.
Some things never change.
Then your teacher is crazy
Western civilization would have never gotten this far then
@@kyrptonite1825 we'd be 600 years behind
Charles Martel didn't do it against Islam btw, Islam was not even fully established, it was rapidely expanding and it was seen as another christian heresy. Muslims were doing razzias (raids) on Aquitaine region, and Martel stopped them in a battle that didn't seem so important for the muslims. Then he proceeded to raid Aquitaine too and sack many cities
As a Portuguese I got to say that only Anglo-Saxons could come up with a version of events where the christians were the aggressors.
I guess they were right then. The crusade was a political move by the Pope where he disregarded all points of christianity to fulfil his dreams of a bloody conquest.
They're
@@dindin8753 Nice to see there is some sense of intelligence down here.
Those people in the media are all FreeMaySons which has its roots in Kabb Alism and the lsIamic world. Some of their orders, like the Shhriners, pay homage to that origin.
Pretty much the India experience too!
so much needed clarification. it's sad to see those movies misrepresented the events.
😂 bro it's a thousand years ago. Christians cannot even figure out what happened in the 1700s
I am Armenian, and due to church records I know that I am related to Levon I the Magnificent , who was the ruler of Armenian Cilicia, one of the main Allies of Western Europe during the crusades. I have lots of stories passed down that I could share too. Overall pretty neat stuff and it’s sad almost 0 Armenians live in Cilicia these days. I also speak western / Cilician Armenian , the Constantinople dialect to be exact, which is unfortunately almost extinct. I’m really glad you mentioned Armenian Cilicia in this video. 💪💪
You should start your own TH-cam channels
Make sure you write it down. The most important words. The ancient words. And the terms. It is important. I did the same for some archaic North Norwegian words. And it turns out, I find them in Norse dialects all over Scandinavia now. Language is our history, so remember it! Much love from Norway!
Pretty cool.
Armenia's story is one of the most tragic, yet inspiring in history. The fact your nation still remains is a testament to God's grace.
I hope your people manage to preserve your history and culture long into the future, God be with ye.
The Crusades were a long delayed reaction to Muslim encroachment. Great video thank you.
Islamism was a long delayed reaction to Western encroachment.
What ? Crusades killed more Christians and everyone hates u guys
As a Greek and a historian, I can safely say that this interpretation of the Crusades is not so present here in my country - Somewhat encounterable on the societal level, but certainly not on the academic level whatsoever. Our cultural heritage aligns with the Byzantine/Eastern-Roman Empire, which at the outbreak of the Crusades had been slowly losing territory first to the Fatimid and later Seljuk Empires for well over a century at least. As mentioned, the reason the Crusades even took place is because Emperor Alexios called upon Christendom in the West for help in a losing war when the Seljuks were nearly at the gates of Constantinople. In their own way, the Crusades were simply another phase of the Byzantine-Seljuk Wars. Our own cultural point-of-view is one that disproves the more modern western interpretation of the Crusades.
I'm not aware of any other culture so full of self-loathing as modern western countries. It's bizarre.
I am a bit taken aback by this video, because it makes this interpretation of the Crusades as mainstream, but even in the West (US) this is not a very academically-rigorous interpretation.
there were many crusades
@Byzantine Historian From what I see, here in Greece people see the crusades as a very positive thing, those who know a little more dislike the 4th crusade for obvious reasons
But generally speaking we Greeks think the crusades were cool
Europe would be Islamic if not for the crusades, I'm an atheist but I can appreciate wanting to hold on to culture and way of life.They did what they thought they should, and was the only time in history Europeans stopped fighting each other for a time and made relations between Christian nations much less hostile.
Our greatest failure was letting Constantinople fall
Western Christians sacked Constantinople and then refused to help when the Ottomans laid siege......the West didn't let Constantinople fall, it intentionally weakened it and ensured it's conquer. Remember that the Catholic Church and it's Pope saw the Constantinople Orthodox Church as an enemy that was a danger to it's influence back then.
Indeed, it was the main cause for the taxation at the commercial sea routes, that ended leading making news ways to travel to Asia and more. It also led to the arrival to America by Christopher Columbus, being part of the history of the world.
Cry about it
@@ekremcakir9274
It *will* be Christian again, as well as Jerusalem.
You'll be crying when it happens.
'One day for no reason at all' seems to be their go-to for why the good guys did what they did
"Good guys", grow the fck up
underrated
The Crusaders weren't the "good guys".
@@markgreen6018 there are no good nor bad guys in history
@@alessandrozanzarella9203that is not true at all
Thank you for outlining this. I knew the Crusades were preceded by Islamic wars far latger, longer, and more atrocious, but this goes a long way to put it all together. God bless you.
@dukedase7 You're welcome to put forth your own evidence, but I've seen this kind of take verified by a prominent ex-Muslim who had everything to lose by doing so.
@@omnitrix1279 cope harder, you lost the crusades and we have the key to your holy sepulchre.
@mustafahussein1858 Enjoy it. Christ's not using it anymore. ;)
@@dukedase7 Islam mandates lying though, so it's not like anyone is likely to believe the other side of the story.
@@HeLpLOstGOdAny1 It's clear what your biases are, I hope you know that.
And the sources don't even have to come from Muslims.
One group you failed to mention who were instrumental in the Crusades were the "Italians" and Sicilians (I put quotes because Italy did not exist at the time). Venice, the Papal states around Rome and of course the Sicilians (recently under the Normans) were the transporters and fighters since they knew the Mediterranean region and how to navigate supplies by boat (i.e. through Messina).
Another group who was instrumental in the liberation of Jerusalem from the muslim invaders was the Maronites . No one mentions them
Yeah but the Venetians also destroyed Byzantium in the fourth crusade
Not to mention any blow to Islam meant less raids on their lines lands and lines of commerce.
I mean there was the title of king of Italy but I get your point.
@thequacken6301 they fucking destroyed the greatest Christian city in the entire world and 100% opened the doors to Ottoman expansion later on. They almost ended Christianity by doing that. It's very plausible Vienna is taken and Islam keeps marching.
Know Islam, no peace.
No Islam, know peace.
Hate and racism! Love to see it
@@duckkk530 explain. Cause the last “Christian” terror group operated during the 1920s, but they didn’t follow the word of God, they followed Satan, so technically they aren’t Christian despite claiming to have been. However, I can’t name a single non-Muslim terror group that is STILL ACTIVE TODAY.
same as christianity,
christianity exist, no peace
christianity doesn't exist, more peace.
@@ruhitbiswas44 Christianity BROUGHT peace to the region! And then they were forced out by Muslim and LOOK WHERE WE ARE.
@@ruhitbiswas44 GOOD ✝😇 vs EVIL ☪👹. Just compare the life of Jesus vs the Muhammed's.
less islam = more peace
What religion started the 2 world wars?
@@hasspass8751none, neither were religious motivated wars
Do you know Hitler hated Christianity and made peace with muslims?@@hasspass8751
@@hasspass8751ww2 was started by Japanese who were bhuddists and Hitler who hated Christian’s. I don’t see your argument lol
@@hasspass8751 are you an idiot?
I read a history book on the crusades, and it covered every crusade in very deep detail.
Ever since then, I have been waiting for something like this to finally enter public view.
Edit: I finally found the name of the book. “God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades”
What’s the book called?
@@ctl9139 I found it, “God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades”
@@howdydobuckeroo1204 thank you!
Nice thank you brother I'll have to read this.
I want something more.A new crusade to drive the mongrels even further Islam is disgusting they only bring pain and suffering upon this world the Greek empire brought civilization and wealth whereas the Islamic people only know how to destroy.
I'm not from Europe, yet the crusades were never seen in a "bad light", they were seen and teached as the Christian response to the Islamic agressions, but even with that, it is great to see a video that talks about it in depth.
(I'm not from Arabia, but the terrorist bombing attacks were never seen in a "bad light", they were seen and teached as the Muslim response to Christian aggression) imagine if a Muslim said that, you hippocrates would went crazy
Where you from, man?
@@Jebusmike3 Colombia, like, the South American country, not to be confused with the many Columbias that exist.
@@lore9828 Right on, I'm actually very glad the crusades are being taught rightly down there. Love from North America 🙏
@@lore9828 Here in México there's a lot of propaganda against the crusades, against the catholic church in general.
They need to make a historically accurate movie
The Hollywood overlords wouldn't allow it. Luckily we're seeing a rise in independent film studios, so maybe?
The truth hurts, especially for the christians. You can learn the truth by studying the history of free mason and how king richard made use of his people under the name of christianity, when its actually his own deep interest in black magic. Thats why, templars are closely related to magic until today.
It wouldn't be this one. The movie the uploader of this video gushes over is full of historical inaccuracies about Baldwin IV of Jerusalem.
He was a 15-year-old teenage king who watched his men fight for him. He became unable to ride a horse at age 16 due to having lost sensation in his arms and legs, soon losing his fingers and toes, then completely disabled until he died at the age of 24.
Not what this video represented, huh?
@@Thor.Jorgensenhe doesn’t really mention him but an actual historical movie with that fella would be nice
crusades or not, jesus was a devil pretending to be god and nothing else. reading the bible is enough for me to see it
What a wonderful video. Thank you for opening my eyes, my brother.
And now Islam is doing the same thing on an even larger scale
"They planned, but Allah also planned. And Allah is the best of planners." Qur'an 8:30 Surah Al-Anfal
@@ॐIothe word is deceivers makireen.
@@DuckMcDuckinsonTrue. Thank you… Allah deceives and lies shameful! It’s in the Koran يمكر الله
@@ॐIo Allah is gay.
@@ॐIo the true translation is "makarin" which means deceiver. That's why he lied to Muhammad and even let Muhammad molest a 9 year old girl.
As a Muslim myself, the context in this video does show why the crusades really occurred. It is understandable if Muslims put themselves in the shoes of the Christians living at that time. Both Christians and Muslim warriors over the centuries have committed atrocities unfortunately, but it is always nice looking at the positives of generally negative events in history. I also appreciated the efforts of Emperor Frederick II showing true diplomacy in the sixth crusade. Great job Pax Tube, subscribed! Greetings from Dubai 🇦🇪
Most Muslims see the Crusade as a war of Christian aggression against Islam but they forgot that Islam was spread by the conquest of Christian land (and the Sassanid Persia). Perhaps it's this one-sided view of history that causes Muslims youth more susceptible to extremism as they see what happens in the modern world (war, civil conflict and poverty in Muslim countries) as a continuation of the Crusade by the "West".
It is nice to see that we as humans can still respect each other despite religious differences.
As a Muslim I say your either ignorant or submissive.
Dude both were on the wrong, the only ones who trully suffered were the true religious. There wasnt a positive at all, only petty leaders in search of conquest manipulating the people and leading us astray from Allah
Good work on being informed of both perspectives. I've never met humans who are wholly bad or wholly good. We're all fallible, contradictory and complex at various points.
Crusades were based, and the reconquista was one of the best wars ever waged by humanity. VIVA CRISTO REY 🙏🏻
¡VIVA!
VIVA!
Not all the crusades, the ones against orthodox Christians were not, we don’t need latin barbarians to push their heresy on us but sure the crusades against the Muslims were cool
Agreed, though the inquisition that followed the Reconquista does leave a bitter taste.
La reconquista no tuvo razón de ser ni fue una reconquista de por sí, los reinos cristianos pelearon entre ellos tanto como pelearon contra los musulmanes, y figuras icónicas como el Cid incluso pelearon DEL LADO de los musulmanes jajaj. Además, qué legitimidad tenían los godos que no tuvieran los omeya o los amazigh? Si no fuera por toda la propaganda carlista y franquista se darían cuenta q los musulmanes enriquecieron la cultura e historia española tanta como los godos, romanos y cartagineses.
Sir, just because you start your video with Bach in the background, you deserve a like and a subscribe!
You'd think the religious conflicts like the Spanish civil war, Russian revolution and subsequent civil war, Chinese civil war, Cambodian genocide, and even recent conflicts in Africa where leftists/Muslims all come of looking worse would rank higher
And also, the Mexican revolution was much, much worse
@AileDiablo up to this day the majority of muslin countries are straight up dictatorships who persecute anything else, get your shit together
@ailediablo79 "Don't want to force people to convert."
It's spelt out in the sharia.
Trying to deny that along with what aboutism is dishonest.
Keep coping it's absolutely barbaric, at least the pope excommunicated the crusaders in the 4th crusade.
@ailediablo79 o9.8 The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first
invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social
order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4)-which is the significance of their
paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues)
until they become Mlim or else pay the non-Mslim poll tax
o9.0 JIHAD
(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada
signifying warfare to establish the religion
Ya I am not really in a mood to entertain blatant denial or asinine defenses.
Read some history.
The spanish civil war wasn't a religious conflict, but an ideological, like most of the others you listed
@Joseph Avenetti ideology doesn't take God into consideration and offers solutions from this world FOR the problems of this world.
Religion offers solutions from God, from the "other" world for problems that are bigger than economics and politics
Im glad to see this getting talked about. I remember going through history classes in school and learning about these events and being alone among my peers and teachers about how the crusades were to fight back against the muslim forces and that the jihads were, at least, no better than the crusaudes and provoked the christian lands though war not just ideologies.
That's because you're wrong.
@@ljss6805 Nah, you just don't know history. Muslims had been launching unprovoked attacks against Europe for decades prior to the Crusades. The Crusades were just a retaliatory strike in an attempt to end the threat of the warmongering desert people for good.
@@ljss6805 He is completely accurate. Islam only spread through the levant, north africa, southern and eastern europe through conquest by arms. Guess what people dont like when you invade and take their shit or force convert their neighbors. The christian response to muslim aggression was entirely justified.
@@musimations5212 Wrong, but thanks for playing. See my other response. Educate yourself first. Tired of this harmful ignorance.
@@ljss6805 My guy said the equivalent of "nuh uh" and then thought he instantly won. Wow.
Imagine a crusader, who fought muslims hand to hand- in Muslim territory- finding out that we are now wholesale importing muslims by the the thousands AND supporting them socially and economically.
I don't like that word, crusader, they should be called what they really are Papal Supremacist!
Crusades were asked to start by the eastern Roman emperor who wasnt a papist@@54032Zepol
Its a disgrace.
Weird how 1000 years later Islamic countries haven't changed.
Why do you lie?
Its crazy how 1000 years later islamic countries are the poorest I wonder why
@@firstnoob3811 in the top 10 poorest countries only 2 are Muslim countries while the other 8 are Christian. So why do you lie?
Most poor countries are actually Christian keep coping 😂😂😂
It blows my mind how modern narratives are basically that the bad guys are good and the good guys are bad, and nobody knows enough about the history to question it
History is a work of construction, not discovery. It's important to remember that history is only 20% chronological events and 80% narrative interpretation; Jules Michelet's account of the French Revolution rivaled Victor Hugo for its romantic rhetoric, and Alexis de Tocqueville's rendering of that same event was a tragedy worthy of Racine. During this time period, only the wealthy and upper social classes were taught the privilege of literacy; so history carries their perspective.
It's safe to say, if you're a Christian fighting to keep land away from the government and migrants, protecting your communities and families and keeping them homogenous, you're on the right side of history.
I loved crusaders when I was little but then as I got a bit older, I found out that they sacked Constantinople in 1204, that one sack decimated the Eastern Roman Empire and ultimately weakened them enough that they fell in 1453. Eastern Roman was one of my favourites. Christians attacking Christians, killed and looted their own brothers.
that some racist sht right there @@lanthanumlanthanium6373
Everyone who knows enough history knows, that there are no totally "good" or "bad" guys
my cultural teacher was demonising Christianity and I am a believer in Christ I
was not able to defend my faith but now that I have the information thank you good sir for helping me find a way to open the eyes of my classmates
There is no such thing as a just war and if you think Jesus would accept any war then you are insane
"demonizing Christianity" lol get real. christians have done terrible things in the name of Jesus. many would argue they brought it upon themselves with their own actions.
@@dllemonI think the Bible says if you are being forced to go against what the Bible says, then you can break that law. This might be an extension of that.
In addition, the conquering of Jerusalem was a just war, as were the other wars David waged in the Old Testament
You're obviously not a very good christian if you couldn't even defend your faith from some woke professor
@@dudebro91-fn7rz I mean, if they’re a professor I’m sure theyve had a long time to gather evidence and examples against you, and that could be hard to combat at the beginning.
Eg. the genocide in the Old Testament(which was acceptable because the people were offspring of demons so they weren’t actual humans, but you wouldn’t know that without context)
Thank you for this - so sick of feeling pressured to apologize for Christian history by atheist ‘intellectuals’ - notice how they never direct their ire at Islam?
I'm an atheist and i hate both Islam and Christianity. And we are many. But of course people like would always conveniently ignore the existence of people like me, you prefer to point at the low hanging fruits, the easy targets that feed your narrative.
They always have direct ire at islam
And the crusades were 100% atrocities that shouldnt have happened doing a minute worth of research tells you
you dont have to apologize for other ppls actions, Islam aswell, but you have to agree this video is very biased and pro-christian that's why you like it, you can tell by the tone and adjectives used for the opposing side
@@Mercury-1820 I wonder what would be the pro-Muslim stance. Muslims where those who did not belong there, they should have expected other war lords to go against them. They are fighters, waged wars from the beginning. Wars are nasty. And you reap what you sow, I guess. The Crusades shouldn't have happened, too many people died. But the Muslim conquest of those lands shouldn't have happened too. See? Even after 1400 years, people are needlessly dying there, including little children and women. The Muslims should have stayed in Medina and spread peacefully. Peace would have been part of the religion and even if they reached as far as Jerusalem, nobody would fight. And if they have fought, that wouldn't have been Islam§s fault.
@@Mercury-1820 they keep deleting xommentsr
This was an amazing video with what I think is an accurate take. Thank you for making this!
Amazing video. Really goes to show that people can attempt to spread inaccurate representations, but eventually the truth will overtake them. In addition, history can usually not be simplified into a good/bad representation, as history is usually quite complex in nature.
Ah yes, everything i disagree with is an inaccurate representation but the video that reinforces my beliefs is the truth lmao. Zero self awareness
@@jacobi-p8k You're putting words in my mouth. I never said or implied that "everything I disagree with" is an inaccurate representation. I was talking about the ideas that are prevalent in my country that the crusades were cruel, a form of agression and perpetrated against innocent states.
This is also what I meant with "truth". The truth is that there were multiple viewpoints, instead of "crusades were cruel agression, end of sentence". It's as if you are reacting to me saying "the crusades were fair and justified" (which I never stated). So it seems that you yourself have quite the emotional knee-jerk reaction to someone who has a different opinion than you, my friend.
@@jacobi-p8k lol basically all comments here.
"Finally a video I can agree with!" "Finally a videos with my opinions and the truth!"
@@jacobi-p8k unfortunately this sentiment applies extremely heavily towards you and not the OP
@@rockstar450 none of the sources you have ever had, actually date back to a relevant point to hold legitimacy. You've deep-throated BS propaganda on the subject since you've been born
I don't understand why a guy being atheist would cause him to prefer Islam over Christianity. What??
This guy seems to think being an atheist just means anti Christian. Which, to be fair, a lot are, especially in the west
Atheists turn first on their original religion and shoot fire so they don't get accused of biased......or accused of hidden Preaching....(Which are the lowest of the lowest)
Saint Paul syndrome
@@jacobb.9181well unfortunately it is
He probably means being atheist means being against wars started over religion and thus supporting the opposition which did "nothing" to provoke it
Bro, the video channel is catholic himself. Hardly unbiased. I will trust a historian more than a random TH-camr.
It's part of western society to be guilted and told other cultures were more admirable.
"culture of Critique for normies" is a great explanation why. It definitely is not part of our society to hate itself. It is being perpetuated by a foreign hostile elite. We did not wake up with suicidal desires as a civilization. We will win, have faith brother ✊
It came from communism. Communism perpetuate academia. Its an anti western idea so western academia interprets history in line with this anti western (meaning anti christian) narrative.
That is a direct result of western cultural hegomony snowflake. You will get a fair treatment when your culture stops being a global culture, until then you are gonna put up with this cuz there is nothing you can do
The muslims invaded Europe in 711 and it took us until 1095 to finally strike back.
Next time around we had better not waited that long.
The land of god belongs to the soldiers of god + is was a conquer not a invaded you should learn history
@@vito7828 Do you have a reading disorder, or are you a muslim yourself?
WW1 and WW2 are a huge reason why Europe is not as religious. The people lost faith in gods
And now they've lost faith in the government.
@ James Wheelz,
Just a jeyws, our traitors planned
That is how my family became atheist. I think the crusades are 100 percent justified, and I wish we could unite as secular western and Christian men to battle the evil of Islam once again.
@@Cheekychappy36 The crusades were so good they sacked and pillaged the Christian city of Constantinople.
Why do you say that?
As a Hispanic Latin Christian , I can tell you my Peninsular ancestors were more than justified in their struggle to liberate their homeland from foreign Pagan invaders .The Crusade was a restablishment of sovereignty against an agressive foreign presence .
And think of all the splendor of the Ancient World that was erased by the Islamic invasion .The Latin and Hellenistic speaking groups in Western Asia , the Coptics , the Armenians and many more Christian cultures and cities of old .And they complain about the Crusades as unjustified .
Well the Caliphate of Cordoba allowed christians to worship what they wanted, plus they brought great wealth and development to the land
@@superspy-xv9sx
1- Under the Jizyah humilliation and more than common killings .
2- The great wealth of al-Andalus was mostly propaganda and for the Arabs , no one else , not even the Berbers .
@@oolooo Well how were they able to build so much amazing architecture then? Plus, the Caliphate was also split off from most of the rest of the Arab world
@@superspy-xv9sx
That "amazing Architecture" was post al-Andalus , during the Taifah of Granada .And it was still Islamic .
@@oolooo The Cordoba Mosque?
I'm grateful to have found a TH-camr like you who shares views I have, for a long time I felt I was alone but I'm glad that's not the case. The Crusades are certainly greatly misunderstood, but we all know why.
The topic itself hits harder for me since I live in Ireland where Catholicism has faced relentless attacks from media and government and all their cronies, another crusade is long overdue in general.
I'd say the Irish people have a legitimate issue with the Catholic Church.
I didn't know much about the crusades personally, but I've never felt so proud to be a Catholic than I do after watching this. We need to bring crusading back for sure
I should not advice this, but ill do it anyway.
PIRATE THAT VIDEO. PIRATE IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Or else yt will delete it if it will hit to high number of views.
@@nicolausg7058 he has a channel on Odysee just in case
@@SIGNOR-G Thanks dude
This video has a bunch of historical inconsistencies and is a reason why history should not be learned from a random guy on the internet.
This comment will probably get deleted but I feel the duty to say what's right.
1. Islam does not introduce slavery anywhere. Slavery exists before islam and is prominent in Asia especially, but also in Europe.
2. Whether it was"right" or "wrong" to conquer lands that were previously Christian is not a point of argument. Do you want to go all the way back and talk about how half the Balkans was forced into Christianity? Is Christian colonization okay, but Islamic colonization wrong?
3. Muslims turning Christian lands into Muslim, introducing "dhizya" (this is the correct word for the tax that was introduced to nonmuslims). This part is correct.
Muslims did not exactly force conversion, but as they were conquering countries they would impose a tax on non Muslims only. So they gave an "incentive" so to say, to turn to islam. And for poor people, this wasn't really an incentive. They had no choice. Christianity in the past had different tactics. In the Balkans they had collective conversions, as in, people wod gather on a place to accept christianity. Whoever refused was forced into it.
I'm only making this point because it seems like you want to say "these were christian lands". You also keep forgetting that, in the times like in the past, people move where the wind blows. Basically, you want to live a good life and you will convert to whatever they want you to. Today, from our comfy homes where we have access to all parts of the world via internet, we cannot grasp this feeling.
4. To whom the holy lands should belong is also beside the point.
5. Muslim inhabitants are portrayed as peaceful, not because they are oh so peaceful, but mostly because the European people that went on crussades were a bunch of bloodthirsty hooligans looking for revenge and the people they were attacking were not exactly expecting it. Muslims were never known as exactly peaceful people. And also it's fair to know that at the time, the middle east, although in Muslim rule, was bustling with inhabitants of different religions.
6. Europe's dark ages have little to do with rise of islam. Middle ages in Europe are called dark mainly because of wars (crussades also a part of this), stagnation in scientific developments due to church prosecuting anyone who steps out of line, and various illnesses (including the plague) as well as the rise of Muslim empires. This is not to say European empires were oh so amazing, but suddenly the Muslims in the east, be it Arabs or later Ottomans, wjo were known as uneducated nomads- were suddenly turning into empires on almost the same footing as themselves, which caused fear. I don't like your "one is better than the other" agenda. We are talking about people here. All are the same. Another characteristic of Middle ages is constant changes in borders in Eruope, movement of people within Europe, Church literally burning people for scientific discoveries- a whole bunch of stuff happened within Europe that had nothing to do with Muslims. This is the reason why historians call it dark ages.
May Allah incrrase you in knowledge
Some kings were good, other kings were trash, some spared everyone, others killed everyone, thats what happened and still happens today, but now, no one cares...
That's right!!!
@Master-mh9vmwhoever claimed such thing is clinically insane.
@@MrToxiclaughter what people are willing to do to desecrate the Name of Our Lord....
“Gods Battalions: The Case for the Crusades” is a great book by Rodney Stark that details the first few crusades and explains the growing tensions leading up to them. Give it a read!
I absolutely will. Thanks for recommending this. I need to educate myself on this topic.
I constantly hear about Christendom being demonized over this topic but I know that Islam isn't this innocent helpless bystander that people make it out to be.
@@Th3BigBoy god bless you
1.When the Muslims took the holy land they enslaved 0 people, stole 0 wealth, allowed anyone who wanted to, to leave, invited jews back after the Christians had murdered and expelled them and allowed all Roman politicians to leave with as much gold as they could saddle on their mounts. When the Christians retook Jerusalem, they smashed babies heads against the walls of the Masjid and killed all jews and non Catholic Christians they managed to capture, so much so the Orthodox and Jews sided with the Muslims.
2. The Jizya, the tax Dhimmis paid, was not a huge tax, it was less than zakkat paid by Muslims, it exempted Christians and Jews from military service and gave them the right to govern themselves and rule their community by their own laws. What Catholic land allowed Jews and Muslims to do that while paying less than themselves lol?
3.The people of the Levant converted to Islam by choice, over centuries. We know this because we have written records of people converting and then paying zakkat. Which completely debunks this spread by the sword notion.
I have some issues with a few points brought up in the video:
The slaves Muhammed captured where evil warriors he never took innocents as slaves only the warriors who opposed him. He freed multiple slaves and a freed slave and black man was the first Muslim to give the call to prayer. The man converted to Islam and was brutally punished by his pagan masters but Muhammed bought him for nearly 20x the normal price of a slave just to free him. You couldn't mistreat slaves in Islam. The reason slavery is still done is because the areas are underdeveloped Islam has no part in this western colonizers do however. Islamic empires took slaves but so did Christian empires and colonizers they would do the same thing if they where in our position that's just truth. No good or bad in history everyone did things for their own gain. Other than that the rest of the video was great! Religious people should be more friendly towards each other to protect ourselves from atheists and the like.
@@farzan1958 Akhi taking the wives and children of thd kuffar you defeat in warfare is halal. To deny this is kufr Akhtar as you deny the Quran. Nabi SAW took slaves and married the wives of the defeated Pagans. ALHAMDULILLAH
When you said at 10:50 "ambitious" knights: something to take note is that there was a mini- baby boom within the generation. Many muslims would point to this and say "they wanted to fight for they had nothing to do, nothing to loose" but infact the proffessional knights were not the 2nd and onward sons that had little but the first sons which had EVERYTHING to loose in terms of land, status and all. - atleast for the generation of the first crusade.
Other than the first few crusades, The battle of Lepanto and how it was one with the rosary was outstanding.
Over all well enough video for the modern man, but as a history man that loves details. real crusades history provides all nonbias approach and much work and I think should be promoted more.
@AileDiablo you make alot of fine points, you speak often on all Muslims collectively. Different rules do different things 1st crusade was justified and in modern words was a total clutch on the crusaders against seljuik turks which did many very very bad things. The other ones loose steam as you point out and that's OK, and with that I shall make my point on the ottomans.
The ottomans were relatively some of the nicest out of their predecessors. And I respect aspects of their culture but they still did have a slave trade of sorts, and as those in Spain climbed upward, so did ottomans as seen with battle of Viena and battle of Malta was protecting Italy. Some of the battles both Christians and Muslims were going at it intensively as we would label today "war crimes".
On Muslims we had our bouts, I disagree with some of your policies and understand others.
One excellent example is to do with 9/11 (the 2001 one since 9/11 is an iconic date for west to fight with islam) Muslims have policy of not having heathen armies in your land (as a ukrainian I empathize with this as little terrorists sitting in our lands lead to invasion) which lead to attack which now all 3 of us know and fight for freedom for freedom is not free!
Tho many things in Christianity proper I respect I realize even our execution of these ideas are not perfect so to some effect I don't hold you so heavily. I have friends in Istanbul which I see as honorable.
Been typing for while but you talked much about Arian vs nonArian which sometimes we settled argumentativly and sometimes it boiled to military action, I would have pointed to albigensium crusade since we wiped then out (even tho they were stronger military, prayer gave us the upper hand, clutch poggers)
Which you mock the trope of blue eye Jesus, which yes is not so historical (many icons do show historical variety but) the purpose of stuff like that is to have the message be comfortable for all nations. Rather than having say Arab culture infused into all other cultures (which would make Arab culture less unique and take away stuff from other cultures) we try to eliminate what bad paganism is but retain whatever culture can be so to tell the truth in the emphasis that they value. As both of us share the philosophy that since God created all- all peoples have had atleast a part of God's message and that must be used if you were to introduce God back to them.
Tho we had our bouts what is most important is to pray, prayer is what leads us closer to the Almighty. Have a good day sir
@AileDiablo the reason why many convert is so they would get a better life in the Muslim country so they don't have to pay more tax just to live there, so they don't have to fear to be taken into slavery.
The Ottoman empire attacks into the Balkans and yes they would force convert, even today force conversion is a thing but does not mentioned widely.
Islam didn't protect all religions, if they are then they wouldn't say jews are bad because they didn't believe in the prophet, they wouldn't mock Jesus death on the cross, but they did.
@AileDiablo Your considerations are legitimate, but not entirely accurate. Forced conversion is prohibited in all Abrahamic religions, yet it was still present, as seen in areas that were Islamized by the Mongols, whose power was based on terror and large-scale massacres. The Arab expansion was halted due to internal wars that led to multiple changes in power until the definitive Ottoman takeover, after which they resumed expansion, including the conquest of Constantinople, which failed on several occasions. Today, the term "Arabs" is often misused to refer to populations that have been Islamized, and as prescribed by Islam, no language other than Arabic can be used. As a result, the Romance languages of North Africa were suppressed, and it is not even admitted that modern Arabic contains Latin or Greek influences. Islamization occurred through military conquests, so what is the point of denying this reality?
Then you describe an unreal history by saying that Christians were not persecuted. With the Ottoman conquests, there was a migratory flow of Christians fleeing to Europe for centuries. In Italy, there are Albanian and Greek communities. Under the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans, converted Christians were preferred because they were deemed more faithful than others. Just to understand, religious taxes were also used by the English against Catholics, with the aim of converting them to Anglicanism. So in Islam, there is another practice that doesn't seem very religious to me, that of having dozens of wives and hundreds of concubines. What's the point of forcing women to cover their bodies completely if those who govern Arab countries are icons of lust? So much so that Arab nobility is practically European because a good part of them were sons of coveted light-skinned slaves. Everywhere there is good and bad, the crusades were carried out for various reasons, and there were opportunists and those who acted out of faith. The jihād used by the Arabs, who were a minority, should be remembered, and the crusades are the same thing.
@ailediablo79 >Bro, there is absolutely no reason for the Crusades
"bro trust me bro we wuz innocent and shieeeet! We dindu nothing" fuck off
@AileDiablo You tell the story as they say in my parts, "to bring water to your own mill". The Arabs were a minority before Islam and the holy war, in which they conquered large portions of territory thanks to the power vacuum, but also because Persia, which you mentioned, was obsessed with the destruction of Constantinople, which they attacked continuously with allies, and always refused peace. The Romans were at war with others who also wanted to conquer the riches of Constantinople. So, are they really so bad for not being conquered? What a population of villains! When the Ottomans rushed with an army to help the residents after an earthquake, they found the walls intact. Imagine their disappointment! In your recent messages, you have said things that are completely biased and the result of indoctrination. It's no coincidence that Islam is a fundamentalist religion. Let's talk about ethnicities that are usually defined as Arabs, because with religion came the imposition of language. It should be said that the conquest was not by the Muslims, but was actually a coalition in which Christian kingdoms were allies. With the conquest of Persia, conversions were not favored, but rewards were offered to those who converted. Therefore, Persians were allowed to use their own language to encourage conversions. Then it was imposed on all occupied countries to use Arabic. In Syria, they no longer speak Greek, in North Africa there is no more Latin, and in Egypt there is no more Coptic. Moreover, for centuries they continued to press for expansion. In Sicily, after conquering a city, they had unarmed citizens killed in a horrible way just to terrorize the surrounding populations. They were mainly raiders, pirates, rapists, like the Vikings, in practice. If you find the term 'Crusade' offensive, it is clear that you do not understand its meaning. Its root is cross, for the cross, which basically indicates the same thing as Jihad, which is used today by Muslim terrorists to kill civilians. What I have described happened before the First Crusade. Mostly, the Arab conquest took place due to a series of fortunate coincidences, mainly rebellions that caused the weakening of the military garrison. Despite all the internal conflicts in Europe, in the end, Muslim rule was rejected, and in Palestine, before Israeli colonization, there were about 10% Christians for fear of further crusades. But this does not prove that there were no religious persecutions. Taxes were minimal, as I said, and were also used by the English against Catholics to force conversion. Public office was also forbidden. So, if I write something against religion, no one cuts off my head. Can you do the same? So what should we envy about those who are not free? Are the institutions of Arab nations presided over by righteous people or are they corrupt and thieving like other places? Religions promote principles, not flags or nationalism.
Love to hear the truth about history.
I consider myself reasonably well versed in history, but this view of the Crusades was completely new to me. Thanks _very_ much for putting this video together. I'll be checking out more of your work... 👍
That’s a real shame. Unfortunately the idea of ‘crusades bad’ is a pretty modern one iirc.
God bless Texas
Funnily enough, nothing that was said here is particularly controversial among the academics. It's just that they choose not to say some of it, and focus on the "correct" part of the truth.
Well, they know who pays their bills, that's for sure.
@@Quincy_Morris what a bad modern idea, that we shouldn’t murder children and women over a belief system. Who have nothing to do with ur life and have done nothing to u. Ur genuinely a psychopath if u trying to justify mass violence in the name of a “peaceful god”
, if you truly read the history with evidence with no emotion you will all ways find crusaders to be no different from vikings and pirates they would kill rape and burn villages just in name of god ,
other hand muslims are way much nicer sure there war here and there but it was the norm back then , for those standards they would never harm to women children in at war they would show mercy at all cost, they use to give high living standards to slaves and prisoners , and rapes where al ways out of question unlike crusaders.
though that doesn't make all the knights bad . there were genuene good ones for sure but every time they claimed some sort of holy war they ended up with intention to raid and distroy
It’s a joy to see pactube upload again 👍
Though I consider myself agnostic, I still massively respect Christianity and Catholicism and the awesome shit they did in the past, including the crusades
Nice to hear you are resprctful and apreciate Christianity.
Un France the crusades are not seen as bad events, at the worst they are treated as “juste an other chain of religion war” and most teachers often talk about it as a essential part of our history
What does an "essential part of history" mean? That's a meaningless statement, like if Germany didn't invade France then it's history would be different, if Joan of Arc wasn't killed it wouldn't have the same history, but saying something is inherintly good because it's history is a bizzare take
@@SamSherr-Nelson you're right, "essential" is neutral here. However, the crusades (the first one at least) are seen as a predictable part of history and it was meant to happen at some point. And even are seen as a good thing in France to combat aggressive expansion in christian and controlled land, as franks were the majority of crusaders at first
yeah but your cities are literally holy
everything was a religious war until the republic
weird considering france is another african country full of these religion of peace terrorist
Lies again? Polite Chef Wal Mart
This was truly a massive eye-opener for me! thank you
Me too
you should watch Fredda's video on it.
If it were not for the crusades most of the world would be living under shariah law, Thank you Crusaders.
I'm not Christian I'm a atheist but I sure as hell agree with that
@@myninjamyninja375 You might not be my brother. But you sure are my bro!
Religion gets interpreted differently by everyone. Christianity was used to justify slavery as much as it was used to abolish it, just like Sharia law today is extremist in some places while lenient in others.
Yeah looks like Islam came very close to become One World Order.
You guys are ruthless
42 seconds in and it’s clear you genuinely have no idea on how barbaric the crusades were, study your history.
Facts. I made it a bit further but I couldn't stand all the mispresented history and propaganda...
@ it’s just absolute crap tbh, the crusades weren’t “ awesome “ at all but his faith based statements are just embarrassing
My country (Bulgaria) ceased to exist for 500 years under ottoman slavery. Ever since our liberation in 1878, contempt for arabs and muslims has been passed down from each generation.
Our Turkish neighbors definitely have different morals now, but their ottoman ancestors are still in power.
Westerners' blind hard-on for muslims is willfully ignorant.
Bulgars nomadics and slavs came to modern day bulgaria and thrace slightly before islam aswell, not that long, just cope with it
500 ''slavery'' is propaganda from the communist bulgaria who justified persecution of non bulgarians
If you are speaking your mother tongue and not Turkish, and if you are Christian and not Muslim, today that means you were under no assimilation nor slavery. The only thing that the Ottomans did to Christians, was tax them extra and had conscription during wars. Just like most countries today.
@@attilanation676Uh-huh, sure. I would advise you to look into all the massacres, that took place in my country, during the "ottoman occupation".
Ottomans were entitled to everything Bulgarians owned, took Bulgarian children at an early age to recruit them as janissary, and punished any act of non-obedience with beatings, imprisonment, and death.
I speak Bulgarian, however, 1/3 of our words are turkish.
You want to turn a blind eye, it's up to you to be willfully ignorant.
@@petresko1041 they took 1 of 2 boys from a family. Yes I understand that this is horrible but you have to admit that the janissaries had a lot of say in politics and military of the Ottoman Empire, and they were all educated in many languages and I know that even alot of those janissaries became grand vezirs of the Ottoman Empire.
Thank you! I remember I was taught in school how evil were The Crusades and didn't know any better for years till I started to read about it a little and it all started to make sense.
Why do you think this was thought to you as "evil" in high school?
The Crusades themselves may not have been evil but the crusaders were. If there’s a hell then most of them are burning in it.
@@kebman from my research, schools usally potray it as a "political" and "power" move. Both side were equally wrong, in my opinion. There was no evil or good it's just all black with blood stains everywhere.
@@kebman Because some teachers use ideology in their classrooms, which should be punishable.
Love how so many people ignore all the Muslim invasions of Europe and then bitch about the crusades.