The Deadly History of the Crusades
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
- Explore the hidden darkness of the Crusades: a time of intense violence, fanaticism, and lasting consequences. Witness the brutality, massacres, and atrocities that shaped history and resonate today.
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
Love content? Check out Simon's other TH-cam Channels:
Warographics: / @warographics643
MegaProjects: / @megaprojects9649
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Brain Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
Places: / @places302
Astrographics: / @astrographics-ve4yq
Two of the deadliest words in any language are Holy Land. Take a patch of dirt, call it sacred and people will die like stinkbugs to possess it.
It's not what it is, but what it represents. Jerusalem means nothing, but it represents a lot to both Christians and Muslims.
Nope, someone once said “the past was always the worst” and I never forgot
Say it with me, The Past was ... 😂
Next episode: Me and the boys on the way to reclaim the holy lands yet again
deus vult!
@@yabutmaybenot.6433 ALLAH AKBAR ☪️💪🏻🔪✝️✡️🏳️🌈🖕🏻
What could possibly go wrong?
Shalom from southern Israel... we've got things covered, thanks. Support would be appreciated though.
@@adamredwine774 Ok
The siege of Antioch was the first recorded instance of people using hand grenades in combat, the first one thrown in the siege is now a widely known Catholic Relic.
The holy hand Grenade of Antioch, people. Look it up!
Ah yes, the holy hand grenade of Antioch!
Also historic of this time was the Vicious Rabbit of Caerbannog that ate crusaders but then died of heart burn.
Except for the fact that the Chinese had them a thousand years earlier
@@fightmaker619 not the holy hand grenade of Antioch.
This really should have been named "The Deadly History of the Outremer" as easily half of the crusades didn't even occur in the Outremer (aka the Holy Land), but were scattered all over Europe. Reconquista, numerous Northern Crusades, even numerous crusades against other Christians, and numerous crusades more _after_ the fall of Outremer. Yes, the Muslims were a "us vs. them" rallying cry to gas people up, but far more people died away from there. it's estimated that between 200k-1m people died in the Albigensian Crusade (Languedoc region of France vs. the Cathar people) alone, and that was against other Christians (heretical, yes, but they were believers) so bad at fighting back it was done in 20 years. And don't forget, the Fourth Crusade--yes, a crusade everyone was proud enough to enumerate--didn't even go to Outremer: It went to Constantinople to fight _other Christians_ on behalf of the Venetians because *money* was more important.
Yeah, later crusades were mostly "these are people that we don't like for one reason or another, let's brand them heretics and make a crusade on them" (e.g. let some other fools fight them for us). Also I remember crusades were exempt of any sins happening during them, so knights happily pillaged perceived heretics and (probably) most went there just with the vision of good plunder and to enrich themselves.
To be fair the 4th was not meant to necessarily "go" to Constantinople as much as conveniently side tracking to one of the worlds biggest piggy banks on the grounds of supporting an out of power political faction.
All the other European Crusades I've always found more interesting, espeacially the Cathars. Even what could be considered ironically a crusade against the Templars.
And now this is re emerging in the US today.
Simon, please change your microphone or adjust your sound settings. The high frequency is ear piercing.
Yes, editors please note, the sibilance is aggravating.
De essing would have really helped. Had to give up after about a min in cos its all I could hear after a certain point
Yeah. This particular video seems less well mixed than usual.
Here’s the transcript of the video:
Ssss ssss s sss sssssss sss! Ssss sssss ss ssss, ssssss sssss? Ssssssssss.
Didn’t notice till I read the comment….
Now do the Barbary Slave Trade
The united states firt over sea war. Go figure eh
Then do the Romans after that
It's odd how many places ignore all the white European and American slaves that were taken.
@@publius5278 That set the pattern for the twentieth century. First, Britain goes to war, and the Americans say, "None of my business." and then get involved, like in WWI and WWII. We'd miss the shores of Tripoli when they sang the song if they didn't help out.
@@yabutmaybenot.6433You don’t get it the important thing bout crusades was the couple Gods chosen people getting it.
I am surprised that the Albigensian Crusade was not included in this video because some historians, including the man who coined the word genocide, Raphael Lemkin, considered it to be a genocide.
I'm also surprised that the Children's Crusade of 1212 wasn't included.
@@pioneercynthia1This one I've at least heard of. I don't remember the small details but I get the gist of it.
The Turks have been known to dabble in genocide as well. I’m sure all of those victims had something in common
The focus is one the Middle East crusades. But there's a reason the word crusade rub people the wrong way.
There were more Crusades against other Christians (like the Albigensian Crusade) than against Muslims. The ultimate suppression of non-Pauline theology resulted in the term Crusade being associated with anti-Muslim conflict, but it wasn’t always that way. Pauline Christianity would rather not talk about the fact that Christianity wasn’t a monolithic religion until the 13th century. It took 900 years to make that happen.
Man who coulda known leading untrained citizens, equipped only with their faith that God would lead them to victory, to war would turn out badly?
well... I have two words for you: children's crusade. People back then thought faith is absolute. Only later the proverb "help yourself and God will help you" came into existence.
Well, they were a ignorant, superstitious lot. It's laughable really.
That's how the vast majority of wars were fought up until relatively recently.
There were very few professional soldiers. The lords could afford training, armor, and weapons. But the majority of forces were peasants with essentially just pointy sticks.
That's part of why the Roman Empire did so well - because they were the first professional soldiers.
@@PetrSojnek Love that one. "Just ignore the fact that he never does anything, it's all part of his plan."
To be fair to the crusaders at that point in history not many armies could defeat Salladin. That said they should have realized lomg before reaching that point that it was a hopeless mission.
It comes back to one of the first things you learn in any military academy. “Armies don’t win wars, logistics do.”
Medieval armies of the period were fine for civil wars, raids and invading their neighbours, but unless they were attacking somewhere they could easily live off the land (and having spent a lot of time in the Near East I can tell you now that you can’t), long term sustained campaigns of conquest were extremely difficult.
One of the reasons the first crusade was so successful, was that they had open lines of supply via the Byzantine empire and shipping routes from the various southern French and Italian powers who had got involved.
The third crusade was primarily, though not exclusively, an English effort and at a time where most of Europe was not interested in helping in any way. The English even had to invade and conquer Cyprus just so they could have a base of operations in the region.
You forgot the 4th Crusade.
Which distroyed the Byzentian Empire.
The reason why orthodox Christians whould rather Choose Muslim rule over wesern rule.
technically there are 8 crusades
lol orthodox christians wants own latin christian west so bad ,they gave thier whole ass empire to muslim turks , lol .most of them went to russia, where they now attacks ukraines killing thier own christian populace . maybe greeks like arabs more than europeans i guess
Wow I’m never this early in a video from Simon. Man biographics really fell off since he left
He left?
@@davidknox5929 ya he left in the fall
Yeah the new host's wannabe Captain Kirk speaking pattern is repulsive.
@@Nipplator99999999999 I liked the intern host Karl but it’s never been the same since Simon left
@@MalikF15he left like a year ago way before fall
You went full joy Reid on this one
Never go full Joy Reid.
Next video: the Arab invasions and slave trade that led to the Crusades, and the ongoing occupation of North Africa
And the video after: The crusades not mentioned against the pagans to purse them from existence... since you REALLY want to play that fucking bullshit game.
But they're the victims. Smh
Oh no he would never. It contradicts the left wing narrative
@@mmerkley402lol
So the vid after that would be Rome conquering the East and North Africa, enslaving the populations there? Yeah. History is pretty complicated, huh? Gtfoh.
Omg! The part with Saladin happened in "Kingdom of Heaven." I own it but havent watched in ages!
It's a fun movie, but the director's cut is a _good_ movie.
You need to watch the directors cut, the theatrical release cut clips that were important to understanding the story. Love kingdom of heaven, probably my favourite historical film
@@v1nc3nt_bl4ck4 omg i definitely need to see that! I love this movie too!
Man, you guys will put the funny mustache man in everything! 😂
All because the actual instructions, i.e. the Great Command, that Jesus gave to His disciples (Matthew 28:19-20) is being ignored. Even to this day.
They should have stopped after the first. That was the most successful one
The Third was pretty successful
The baron’s crusade in 1239, although a lesser known crusade, is arguably the most successful crusade since the first.
(They regained Jerusalem 52 years after Saladin took it in 1187 at the Battle of Hattin).
Religion isn't compatible with reason.
@@rubiconnnreason is instrumental.
@@Zack_P_PanosLoL successful the German king wes Kill by TURKS the France likes always run from WAR and the English fell to reconqueror Jerusalem 😂
Please turn down the music!!!
Thank you for mentioning the slaughters of Jews; that usually gets forgotten or even ignored in all of this.
I'm so confused by the writing here. I've never seen anyone call the Crusades noble or a struggle of good vs evil. It's always been framed as an example of religious extremism and violence.
Based on the examples at the end, it seems like the framing is a setup to critique those extreme and violent enough to view it that way.
I'd have to watch it again to hear exactly how things were phrased, and I'm essentially just going to parrot what this person above me already said, but my assumption is that the writer is conveying the crusaders' motivations and justifications for their actions; that in their minds, based on their dogmatic beliefs (and centuries of power struggles between groups with different beliefs for control of various regions), they truly believed that they were doing the righteous thing. Carrying out God's will, so to speak.
About 40-something years ago, two brothers killed their sister-in-law and niece here in Utah because God told them she was evil and keeping their brother from following their fringe beliefs. In the book Under The Banner Of Heaven, Jon Krakauer writes about how weird and bonkers that would be---to commit such a heinous act because you GENUINELY believe God is telling you to do so.
Sorry for the long-ass reply. It kind of went off the rails midway through, haha. ✌️
Yea, of course now that is how we see it. But the crusaders themselves didn't have hindsight unfortunately.
Depending on who wins, in what manner they end consequently who gets to write the history I can see the wars that are going on today being viewed in quite a lot of different ways in 50, 100 or 1000 years. Even though I'm quite firm in my believes now I think I'm on the right side, that does no mean they will align with future generations :)
It’s more so the internet crusaders who praise the crusade when in reality they have no clue about the never ending immorality, decadence, debauchery, and brutality that took place.
You fail to factor in that for Islamist’s to embark upon a jihad, their doctrine dictates that it can only be done in two ways: either they are declaring themselves the new caliphate (which of course they aren’t prepared to do) and calling for all of Islam to jihad OR they can do it independently in defence of Islam… which means having to drum up some kind of perceived attack upon the Islamic world. The easiest way to frame this is to liken it to a crusade. Islamists are driven by political ideology whereas Muslims are motivated by religion. The two are quite different
That is one interpretation from multiple sets. It is like quoting Catholic doctrine to represent all Christians.
death cult=death cult
@megaflux7144 because Christians have never shed innocent blood.. never justified slavery with Christianity, never killed those who looked different in the name of god, never subjugated entire populations.. nah, Christianity is the religion of pacifists and enlightened folk; that's why they violently defend people like Donald Trump.. go play dude
@@megaflux7144
Are you talking about the Knights Templars?
@@badluck5647 autistic huh?
How many people have died in the name of a god and religion?
And still do, then lets ask how many people still kill in the name of religion?
Why is there so many religions in the first place? Why couldn't a god or gods unite the human beings and each one of their representatives claim they are the true one so their followers could look down on others? That's the question. Surely all of them couldn't be the true one and they would eventually lead to conflict so it was all planned ahead
The way this video has been presented, is basically another “and one day for no reason at all, the Crusades happened” type of presentation. Completely ignoring the event that happened immediately prior, causing the crusades
You have to start somewhere.
Taking up the Cross looked a lot like taking up the sword in that image....
Thank you for uploading this. I love history. Specifically this type of History, the crusades and all that stuff. Next video , Mehmet attempting to take Constantinople.
Nothing says ‘Christ’s love’ like killing thousands indiscriminately. Of course, religion has been used to justify the most ghastly acts of cruelty towards fellow human beings for centuries 😐
The more I read of the Crusades as a teen, the more convinced I became of the evils of organised religion. Nothing I have seen in the 50 years since have convinced me otherwise. Thank you for this expose of the evils of the Holy Crusades.
You won’t have to worry about Christianity anymore, Islam will dominate Europe in say 80 to 100 years
Oh I agree so much with that, I came to the same realisation.
Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot would like a word with you.
@@billbissenas2973these biased fools will do anything to convince themselves that war is a product of religion. Even ants go to war.
Think we have a problem here.
John 1:20 "If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen."
So lets go destroy some other people?
It’s the same problem that always pops up when religious institutions gain political power: you end up with a bunch of people in charge who don’t actually care about the teachings, and are just using it for power. The medieval Catholic Church was like this, a lot of the current governments in the Middle East use Islam for it, and I believe Japan has historically had Buddism twisted to this end. Ultimately, if you try to combine church and state, all you will achieve is the corruption of both.
Thank you, and great point. Obviously there are so many things one can point to from what took place and condemn as a human being, let alone a Christian. And there was so much of what did happen that you can not in anyway square with the teachings of Christianity. But, there is a lot of missing context from this video that helps to explain, at least it's genesis, in part. Please know, I am not saying being able to explain is equal to justification or condone.
As you pointed out we are called to love our neighbors as ourselves. So, if we see our neighbors being enslaved, tortured, raped, and murdered. To do nothing is, in fact, sinful and shows we love our own safety more than we love our neighbors. There is only one righteous justification for taking up arms, defending those who can't defend themselves. Preventing harm to those who cannot do so themselves, by stopping those seeking to harm at all costs.
This is where the missing context comes in. What led up to the First Crusades, was the conquest of the Muslim Calaphates across much of North Africa, Middle East, and SE Europe, most of which was inhabited by Christians. These Muslim Conquests were brutal. They forced all to either convert to Islam or you would at best be forced to be a 3rd class citizen, aka dhimma and pay the jizya (a massive tax burden for not being muslim). And at worst you were either enslaved or outright slaughtered. In many cities, towns, and settlements during the conquests, there was only one option, convert or die. The men (usually age 12 up, sometimes all males no matter what age) would all be killed for the most part, very few young men were enslaved unless they had some expertise of value. Most of the women (from young as age 7) were raped and either enslaved or killed. Young kids were captured and enslaved.
This was the background of what led to many Christians to take up arms and defend all of those people who couldn't defend themselves. The Muslim Conquests were the overwhelming primary cause of the First Crusade. But again, this doesn't mean there weren't many others who had impure motives. It doesn't mean some or even many of those who took part in the Crusades didn't commit atrocities themselves. And it should go without saying. If the group you are fighting against to protect the innocent, commits atrocities. Doesn't justify one to commit those same atrocities in return. The only point I am making, is that it's not as quite black and white as the video leads us to believe. In many respects the reason for, at least the First Crusade, was morally and spiritually just. Again, that doesn't mean it was righteous or just in praxis.
I hope my comment was helpful in trying to make sense of a very complex topic. If you disagree and think I am wrong, I would love to hear your rebuttal.
Christianity always needs to stay away from politicians as the politicians will always use Jesus as a prop for their own goals.
Drop the music!!!
A Templar knight who fought in the Seventh Crusade lamented:
Rage and sorrow are seated in my heart...so firmly that I scarce dare to stay alive. It seems that God wishes to support the Turks to our loss...ah, lord God...alas, the realm of the East has lost so much that it will never be able to rise up again. They will make a Mosque of Holy Mary's convent, and since the theft pleases her Son, who should weep at this, we are forced to comply as well...Anyone who wishes to fight the Turks is mad, for Jesus Christ does not fight them any more. They have conquered, they will conquer. For every day they drive us down, knowing that God, who was awake, sleeps now, and Muhammad waxes powerful.
And here we stand today countless churches getting vandalised,burnt down,graveyards destroyed,all by muslims in western Countries.
They truly conquer all.
Just to point out to the “whataboutism” going on in the comments with reference to the Muslim conquest of the Middle East and Jerusalem; yes these were just as brutal as the crusades, if not even more so.
However, the argument that some people are making, that the crusades were a direct response to this, is simply false. Muslim forces captured Jerusalem between AD 636-638 (sources disagree on the exact date) and the first crusade was not launched until 1096.
That’s a 4 and a half century gap! For context, that’s like something happening in Tudor times and the UK only getting round to militarily responding today.
The two events were not connected.
Wow, you really are stupid aren't you? Do you not realize that the Muslim Conquests had reached all the way to France? These weren't two events separated by over 400 years. The Reconquests began all the way back in the 8th century. The fact is, it wasn't until 1096 that the European powers taking part in the First Crusade were in a position to even consider taking back Jerusalem. You speak as if Muslim Conquest stopped after taking Jerusalem. You completely left out the rest of the history that shows just how connected these two events are and completely disproves your argument, convenient. It seems as though your Christian/West hating worldview leads you to try and mislead those who are ignorant of the history. Either that or it is your own overwhelming ignorance that led you to make such a blatantly and verifiably false claim. But, by the tone of said comment, it's pretty clear it is the former.
You are wrong. Look up the period of Islamic golden age, and the European dark age. The Mediterranean was safe to travel and trade connected Europe to Asia until Muslim piracy cut off Europe from the rest of the world and place it into the "dark" age. The Turks did this to Europe again in 1453 which is why the maritime empires of Portugal and Spain sought different routes to connect Europe back to the global market. Europe is a prime example of countries that become brutal oppressors because of how many they have had brushes with themselves eg Akkadia
The crusades happened because the Muslims didn't stop at Jerusalem. They kept conquering all the way deep into Spain for 400 years. The crusades were a response to the realization that the Muslims were never going to stop conquering westward.
@@mikewazowski8369Yep. Islam already controlled Egypt which was Europe’s breadbasket for centuries and dominated trade. The Eastern Romans were getting bullied out of Asia almost entirely. It was a strategic move for the Europeans to help prop up Eastern Roman power, but instead of helping the Romans they all sought spoils for themselves. Also the Romans didn’t want to have to pay to feed all of the crusaders so they were constantly fighting over that. It was a literal quagmire.
@@mikewazowski8369 You really do not know history. The Muslim Conquests were all the way up into modern Europe in the 8th-9th Century. When the initial Reconquests began taking place, leading to the Crusades. The Crusades pushed the Muslim Conquests back. Then after the Crusades the Muslim Conquests pushed back into modern day Europe. You literally have no idea what you are talking about. Learn legitimate history before making a fool of yourself.
That's not 'The Siege of Akree!' it's pronunced Aker like the British land area measurement.
Was thinking isn't is Acre like my field is 40 acres etc.
All because the Pope wanted direct access to the revenue from pilgrimages to Jerusalem and some feudal lords wanted more land.
THIS FR
and a response of 400 years of Muslim attacks on Christians
My .02 on the 'Crusades'- Different religions and the people who choose to fight/murder/rule over others who didn't believe/follow the same way.
Done.
There's two sides to every coin. Can we get a video on the other side?
No… even Simon isn’t cancel-proof.
@@brandonlm0125 thats funny Simon using the Muslim word infidel trying the projection Crusaders bad other side good what a joke
Please tell us, what's the other sidE?
What do you think was missing?
Snowflake. This shouldn't hurt your feelings.
People really thought of the crusades as honourable? Wow
That surprises you? I would be chocked if some historian came out with some theory like "All the crusaders knew they that what they were doing was wrong but they did it anyway". That is way harder to believe ^^
@eldsprutandedrake i think the poster means people today. People back then, sure.
I thought Baelin was not actually in the Crusades at all (actually dying in Europe when the siege of Jerusalem was going on), but was anachronistically placed there in the pseudo-historical movie "Kingdom of Heaven" as the protagonist?
Cant wait for more historical content!
Eisenhower also used the word "Crusade" before D-Day.
Even Simon would get cancelled if he did a video about what the other side did before, during, and after the crusades.
Exactly you only hear about how terrible it was that the crusades happen, but never a peep about the countless holy wars Islam has waged.
@@chrismaurer6678 they’re the only cancel-proof group with multiple genocide attempts.
Literally anyone interested in the subject understands that both sides were fucking monstrous to the other, MAYBE with the exception of Saladin, calm yourself
@@Ayem427 literally uses the word incorrectly, then tries to argue their intellectual prowess 😂
Meanwhile crusaders were eating humans. 🤷🤦
6:08 Just the Crusades? When I learned this, I knew I'd never believe in a religion.
Aw, I was hoping for a bit on the sacking of Constantinople. They may not have made it to the place they wanted to sack, but hey, this one's foreign enough!
Ah yes, the Crusades, so many fond memories. Religion is beautiful.
Crusades need to make a,come back seriously, especially what's happening in the UK
wow, this comment section is getting worse by the minute
@@HerrGerbrandthe’s not wrong
Did you even watch the video? The Crusades were a pointless waste of lives that had didn’t even achieve their goal long-term. You’re basically saying “we should waste the wealth of nations and countless lives on a goal we will completely fail to achieve.”
Venice: I like the new spices but it killed the trade routes.😂
Why do you think the New World was discovered?
Dealing with Arabs was and always been a dangerous endeavor
Violence and religion need to get a room. They're all over each other. They can both leave me alone. I don't want anything to do with either of them.
Stalin and Mao whole-heartedly agree with you.
@@billbissenas2973 and Hitler agrees with you.
@@dreadnoughtus2598
@@dreadnoughtus2598 This Hitler?
“You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the fatherland as the highest good? The Mohameddan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?" - Hitler
Goebbels wrote on 29 April 1941 that though Hitler was "a fierce opponent" of the Vatican and Christianity, "he forbids me to leave the church. For tactical reasons."
Speer noted in his memoirs that Bormann relished recording any harsh pronouncements made by Hitler against the church: "there was hardly anything he wrote down more eagerly than deprecating comments on the church". Within the transcripts, Hitler speaks of Christianity as "absurdity" and "humbug" founded on "lies" with which he could "never come personally to terms."
“But Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery.” - Hitler
It of course would come to an end, that was always going to happen, can’t maintain dominance in highly hostile lands so far from home, having free flowing supply lines simply that stretched was not attainable. But despite all this, we invaded, successfully took Jerusalem, and remained there in control for nearly a century. With everything against them, and i mean everything, it’s incredible they held Jerusalem that long
No one actually thinks that the Crusades were glorious. Seriously where do these weird ideas of what people think come from?
You haven't been listening to the Christian Right here in the States.
@@PJWestfield what the hell is goin‘ on over there?
look through this comment section for examples
@@schocoman3000We have a bit of a fascism problem. Thankfully, they keep doing things that undermine their attempted power grabs, but it’s not great.
This comment section, by the looks of it
Why do so many people and religions fight over Jerusalem?
This is basic knowledge, its the main holy place of Christians, Muslims and Jews, and those fanatics are too blind by fairytales and pride to do anything but kill for it😂
For Christians, Jerusalem contains the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. They believe Jesus was crucified there, on Golgotha (aka the hill of Calvary) and that his tomb is located inside the sepulchre, where he was also resurrected. For Jews, there is the Kotel, aka Western Wall, which is the remnant of the retaining wall of the mount on which the Holy Temple once stood. The temple contained the Holy of Holies, the most sacred site in Judaism. Jews believe that this was the location of the foundation stone from which the world was created, and where Abraham prepared to sacrifice his son Isaac. For Muslims, Jerusalem contains the shrine of the Dome of Rock and the al-Aqsa Mosque on a plateau known to Muslims as Haram al-Sharif, or the Noble Sanctuary. The mosque is the third holiest site in Islam. Muslims believe the Prophet Muhammad travelled here from Mecca during his night journey and prayed with the souls of all the prophets. Nearby, the shrine of the Dome of the Rock holds the foundation stone, where Muslims believe Muhammad then ascended to heaven. (Information from the BBC article "What makes Jerusalem so holy?" 30/10/14)
The same reason for most wars, religion
Damn Simon, you were running through this so fast, that I literally stopped the video to check my playback speed. 😅
How many channels now, Beardmeister?
This is a one sided selective remembering of history. The crusades were justified because of Islamic aggression. The issue was that many Crusader used this effort as an excuse for bad behaviour. This isnt Christianity. Read the teachings of the Christ. Christianity for its first few hundred years, before the conversion of the Roman Empire, spread to millions of believers peacefully despite persecution and execution for their beliefs. Islam cant say the same. It spread through the sword and forced conversion.
This should have been called "European Crusaders were Vicious Idiots".
I’m so upset I just heard “still reverberates” and it wasn’t in Ronnie fashion
10:50
Where can I get a Saladin hat? It would look great at a Phish show
I don’t know where the idea of the Crusades as a series of heroic struggles came from, because even the only successful one was an unmitigated disaster that directly contributed to the eventual fall of the Byzantine Empire, and the others were even worse. The Crusades brought nothing but ruin to the major powers involved, and wasted thousands of lives for no permanent gain. The only real benefit was that they helped put checks on the powers that lead to such disasters to occur; it isn’t mentioned in this video, but Richard actually got abducted on his way back to England, and trying to force the people to help pay the ransom lead to the creation of the Magna Carta.
Yeah that's not accurate lol
The Magna Carta was created because his successor, King John, tried to make reforms that upset the nobility. Richard was already dead.
@@Sandlin22 Care to explain?
That thumbnail is misleading. There is no in-depth explanation of why it happened. Just the generic "reclaim the holy land" answer.
Religious people are crazy people
Fantastic video
Highly recommend the channel “Kings & Generals” for a much more in depth look at individual battles that took place throughout each crusade and a much more contextualized and nuanced commentary on each person of importance involved.
I'm not a religious person, and this is in no way an attack on peoples beliefs... but it always blows my mind that most wars (and resulting deaths) are fought over religious beliefs. Every religion fights and dies over who's God is better and more righteous. Again, this is just my opinion, and I'm in no way trying to single anybody out.
It was self defense
Another example, out of the uncountable many from history, of how religion has made the world such a better place for everyone.
*sarcasm if it wasn't obvious*
Creator, please help us find the Peace that everyone of us sane people so desire .,
Sane people don't have imaginary friends.
@@Navybyrde the smart ass I was waiting for that kind of comment xD there is always 1 .
@@sandmandzkhalil3618 learn how to use punctuation. It will help improve your reading skills, and that will help you read your Bible. Invariably, when someone actually reads the Bible they learn that it's all recycled stories from before Judaism.
Fairy tales.
I really love researching the crusades, I have an additional take on Pope Urban II speech at Clermont which I am going to force upon you all /j, not trying to disprove anyones point here, just wanna share some stuff I think is really interesting.
Based on recounts and summaries of the speech taken by attendees, Pope Urban II's goal heavily leaned towards demonizing other religions, particularly pagans, and giving the leaders of various Christian nations, kingdoms, and serfdoms a reason to fight for Christianity. In an account of Pope Urban II's speech by Fulcher of Chartres he says "All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ!"(located at the top of paragraph 5 in the source labeled [1] below) Calling the Pagans a "despised and base race" is likely to fuel hatred towards them. Pope Urban II frequently references wounds(sins) and salting(penance) at the beginning of his speech, heavily implying that his audience has sinned and must repent. The path he gives them towards salvation is the first crusade.
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk /j.
If anyone wants to know more about Pope Urban II speech at Clermont here's a source for six different recounts of it.
[1] August. C. Krey. The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants. (Princeton: 1921) sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/urban2-5vers.asp
If anyone wants to know more about the slaughter of the Rheinland Jews here's some good primary sources for that as well.
[2] Bongars. Gesta Dei per Francos. translation in Oliver J. Thatcher, and Edgar Holmes McNeal. eds., A Source Book for Medieval History. (New York: Scribners, 1905) sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/1096jews.asp sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/cde-atcp.asp
It’s hard to even comprehend how much bloodshed and people who suffered…..attacker and defender, if there’s a description of hell…this is it.
i’d advise everyone to skip reading the comments on this one and go and drink some water.
That and just be thankful we didn’t go through this kind of stuff
@@willmitchell4967- Europe is going through it right now.
😂😂😂😂
You got about half the facts wrong my dude. To call out one the first crusade took back the peninsula Iberica (spain and Portugal) which was which was at that time under complete control of the Muslims.
That might have been the first crusade they did but what they call the first crusade was to retake Jerusalem
Just what Jesus would have wanted.
Comparing George W Bush (widely known for his gaffes while speaking) saying something mindlessly to AQ and Bin Ladens EXPLICIT jihad is a reeeeal stretch... Your writers are doing some WILD work lmao
Started after they got attacked
That Saladin had an amazing hat!
The funny thing is that Hitler in private actually despised Christianity and admired Islam.
One of his plans was to eventually gradually replace Christianity with a mix of Islam, Norse and Roman mythology, medieval Alchemy, and early UFO beliefs
Hitler was nothing if not a nut job
Deus Vult
Wasn't there a holy handgranade from Antioch?
I believe you pulled the pin and counted to four then you throw at thy enemies who are naughty in thy sight.
How dare Simon not cover such a famous historical artifact
The crusades are a prime example of all the is wrong with religion. Why there is no rehabilitating it in anyway. And why we will all be better off when all religion is gone.
I'm surprised you didn't talk about the fourth crusade or the northern crusade. Those were some doozies
They were all doozies after the third. The fourth crusade weakened Constantinople so hard that it wasn’t ever able to fully recover, thus leading it to its fall to the Ottomans in 1453.
I guess the video is focused only on crusades against islam, but there is also 4th crusade and northern crusade, tho I guess they were less about faith and more about expansionism
So much death and suffering for an imaginary sky daddy who is the same in all abrahamic religions.
Great video Simon, but I wish you’d talked about the Leper King, Baldwin IV - you briefly mentioned Balian yielding the city to Saladin and Hattin. Anyone who wants a good idea of that period, I would recommend watching 2005’s The Kingdom of Heaven.
Baldwin IV and Saladin Ayubi had a weird relationship, despite being on opposite sides, they had immense respect for each other. Some of the stories around them are amazing, and it makes you wonder if more Christian leaders had been like Baldwin, and more Muslim leaders like Saladin, maybe there could have been peace or at least an understanding between the empires
This is just the nature of warfare at the time
Religion is a racket
War brings out the worst in people no matter how holy it is.
John Crusader GOLD & The Lady Matilda of Somerset
Note : " The Lady " or " Lady " in the middle ages meant Princess or Blood Royale
There's something wrong with the audio in this one.
All religion is a foolish answer to a foolish question
Sultan Baibars, the greatest enemy of Christianity, a great warrior, capable governor and statesman, ill-mannered and shifty, died on 1 July 1277. Barakah, Baibars' son and heir, was deposed in the 1279 uprising of the Emir Kalavun, who had proclaimed himself the Sultan of Egypt several months earlier. In July 1283, Kalavun renewed the peace agreement with the commune of Acre and the Templars in Atlit and Sidon. His goal was to prevent a possible alliance between Franks and Mongols in Persia. The peace did not include Tyre and Beiruth, and Kalavun prepared to attack the Christian enclaves not yet protected by the agreement. His first goal was the Hospitaller fortress of Margat. The time had come for him to punish the monks from this fortress who had, in autumn 1281, joined the Armenian king's forces and on 20 October by Homs sided with Mongols in the battle against the Mamluk army.
Williams, P.L., 2001. The Complete Idiot's Guide to the crusades, Indianapolis, IN: Penguin.
It should be noted that although the Crusades certainly inspired a lot of Islamic thought the idea of Jihad comes direct from Mohammed three centuries earlier.
A lot of Henry Jones Sr. quotes here.😊
You'd think that, after thousands of years, humans would outgrow the need for superstitious beliefs and religion.
Baybars was also a consummate diplomat, able to negotiate treaties that harmed his opponents while benefiting himself. Furthermore, he was prudent in his choices, only engaging the Il-Khanate on his own terms and whittling away its cli- ents when the il-khan was occupied elsewhere. His actions were impressive by any standard, but when one considers that he did this while simultaneously jockeying the literally cutthroat world of Mamluk politics, one must rank him as one of the greatest leaders in world history even though relatively few people today know the name. Baybars.
Yes, a lying, murderous thief truly makes for "one of the greatest leaders in history." Maybe let's not honor people like Baybars.
It's important to remember that the instigators were initially the Muslims since at that time their culture was one of expansion through domination. And up to the beginning of the crusades, the Muslims had expanded rapidly from Africa up into Europe and the crusades were seen as much as a way to stem the tide and it was to take the city itself (which was certainly important).
Acre..pronounced (A-cur)
Very nice. Now let's see the one about the war crimes of the Caliphate
butt hurt huh ? xD really hurt when knowing Christianity isn't about "compassion".
The crusades followed 300 years of military conquest by the forces of Islam reducing the geographical size of Christendom by 50%. Iberia was still occupied until 15th century. You can see why something had to be done, even as you can see it was not done well.
Awww you skipped one of my favorite bits. Gregory VI was kicked out of Rome by the supporters of antipope Clement III and Urban II inherited that position, so part of the benefit for calling the crusades was to stick it to the Emperor and show that Catholics viewed him as the _true_ pope. Also kind of funny is that the contemporary Arabs who weren't in direct line of the Crusaders didn't consider it a big deal. To them they called it the Frankish Wars (because the French were overrepresented in commanders of the Crusaders) and the Crusaders were just one out of _many_ power blocks in the region all fighting for political control. Just as the Christians fought wars in Europe against each other, the Muslims were not united and they did fight each other too. Maybe this was due to the relatively limited successes the crusaders had, but while those who got to see them up and personal considered it brutal, the Arabs not in the immediate vicinity (which was actually most of them) just considered the crusader states a nuscince because the Europeans had a tendency to walk into the desert without adequate water supplies. When Turks of the 19th and 20th century tried to draw their views about the Crusaders, they had to take a lot from _western_ sources like David Hume and so on because their own sources of that time tended to focus more on the larger power players of the region.
Acre
AY-KER
In which crusade was Monte Python? How about Crusader Rabbit?
The first crusade happened because the Byzantine emperor asked the pope for help.
The pope found a solution to all the infighting in Europe and sent all of them to the Holy Land.
You would think history had taught humans not to horde wealth and try to separate societies by class(slavery), yet our history is plagued by futile dogma enshrouded by the guise of a religion be it jewish or christian, it matters not. Religion doesn't make people equal by default, equality and freedom have always been paid in blood usually by the innocent and poor. Stupidity is Stupidity and I see fault on all sides. When your neighbor is starving to death because you took more than your share, would you really be surprised to find yourself on the wrong end of a sword? Violence takes many forms, but in its most cruel shape it is projected and paraded around as "religion" and "love".