"It's worth noting, that both sides were surprised by the other's combat potential." Indeed they are. They presented a traditional, centuries old steppe warfare like Scythians and Huns did before them. Its been reported that the Turkish Horse Archers felt like wtf when their composite bow did much less damage to these new enemies. So much so they hesitated about where to aim to kill these men of iron. I watched this video before but did it again because of its detailed and amazing narrative, great job BazBattles!
Marcus Licinius Crassus at Carrhae, yeah, am i a joke to you? Battle of Brenta they say the same thing "first time Westerners experienced eastern warfare style" Each time they repeat themselves about Western and eastern warfare meeting That sucks with the eastern way, you are on a horse you shoot an arrow and you flee, WTH!? Glad to not come from an eastern warfare style civilization, thx God i am a Westerner
@@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 East have always been superior society in everything including warfare till 18th century. They have developed much better technology, war tactics, generals etc. That's why Eastern history is a lot richer than Western. Amount of proper battles between strong armies, amount of dynasties, empires, religious sects, games for thrones women being major figure etc. are considerably higher. And First crusade would've surely failed if Seljuq Empire wasn't in disintegration period after death of Malik Shah. Remember Fatimids were uncapable state which was ruled through an ideology and couldn't hold any half decent campaign against Seljuqs on the battlefield.
@@turalf.9039 well and by this logic, Byzantium would had not fallen without inside instability neither, do you even know that the battle of manzikert is not the direct consequence? Most of the troops didn't even fought, and there was a dynastic crisis, which led anatolia open to conquest, with barely no opposition. In the same way the Crusaders (first crusade) were able to advance quickly because the seljuk barons helped crusaders against their own kin, they knew if they regrouped , the neighbor would attack them while they go on campaign
@@turalf.9039 The history of the East is richer? I think you're mistaken, but I can't be sure because I don't know what you qualify as the East or as richer. When looking at what people consider to be the East it's only like 30 countries. Not only that, but a lot of their history has been obliterated over time; maybe a lot more is lost. If you're counting lost history as part of the richer history, I think pre-17 century North/South American history might also has a lot as well. Still, I just don't see how anything can even come close to matching Mediterranean history. They were exceptional record keepers.
Holy shit these crusaders must have been tough guys. Just the amount of miles they marched with full gear is astounding, right through the hottest parts and surrounded by enemies...gotta have massive balls and stamina to do that!
Actually because in those ages you wouldn't need to wear a cloak waiting in an alley heat the hijabi just passing with a club and run. You could massacre all her family, struggle her while raping her and be considered a hero. Those were good ages. ;)
Im hungarian and goddamnit i laughed so bloody hard when i saw "baszd meg magad" which literally means 'go f**k yourself' :) little touches like this is why i love your content man, keep up the good work! :)
I actually took the time to... *pause the video....that's not it... then got to google translate to find out and it told me to "go f**k yourself"* ...definitely worth it...
Lord Voldemort In a way, the major battles of the First Crusade could be compared to the major battles of the Original Star Wars Trilogy. Dorylaeum was the First Crusade's Yavin, Antioch was Hoth, and Jerusalem was Endor.
@@daviddavison2582 he was trying to imply that there isn't any friction because it's been "50 years" or somesuch, ignorant that the very fact that it was destroyed counters the orginal claim that there's "no major friction"
@@daviddavison2582 he means that Christians could also raze Mecca, pretending that nothing major happened. then some years later rebuild it and Christians be like "Its a prank bro"
Ups and downs may occur but you can't reject the fact that the fatemi dynasty was the most tolerant, accepted and loved Muslims dynasty, having major contributions in science, technology and literature
@@joonsuter9307 This golden age came from their piracy and pillaging of the Mediterranean sea trade, which in the past was safe for all. Muslim pirates enslaved many that came by. Many parts of Armenia were Christian and taken by force, pillaged, and enslaved as well. Muslims slowly took more land and encroached the Spanish lands on the west. Tell me where the Fatimid tolerance is coming from?
I friggin love these series and the way they are presented (historic, maps, with graphics.) These are perfect - not too much information and not too little, just enough. Congrats to you all.
Regarding the actual situation in the holy land. While its true that jerusalem fell almost 400 years earlier, its also important to know that islam is not a homogeneous organization. Shi'a muslims of the fatimid dynasty were constantly at war with sunni Seljik turks, who took and retook jerusalem from each other several times, creating enormous instability in the land. The Fatimid Caliph ordered the destruction of all churches in jerusalem at some point in the 11th century. Around the same time, that same caliph also banned the celebration of easter, and the use of wine. Raids on christians as well as muslims from the warfare were commonplace. Christian pilgrims were often attacked on the roads. The statement that I hear often that life was all peachy for all religious minorities in the levant prior to the first crusade is false. Its an attempt to push islam as a wonderful religion while Catholicism as aggressors. The truth is alot more complicated than that. Sure there were a variety of factors, both political and religious behind the crusades. But defending christians and their ability to visit the holiest sites are most certainly a major factor and not one to be dismissed offhand.
It is even a topic of discussion that whether the religious part of the crusade was actually the primary objective or just a kind of propaganda to make people join it
I just find it ironic, how people in the far right have seemed to by the false narrative... They have so much of their platform these days based around the stupidity of the Muslim immigration, the terrible nature of Islam, etc... And then simultaneously agree with them whenever it deals with Jews or Israel really. Strange to see Islam and the alt-right become the best of bedfellows.
The statement about coexisting religions is a false one. Non muslims had to pay protection money to be able to stay christian or jewish. They had to wear indications of their religion so they were publicly displayed as lesser than a muslim. Enter the yellow star. Non muslims were bullied and abused. Pilgrims often attacked and killed on the roads. The crusades were a direct response on muslim behaviour. How dare you speak of christian atrocities while these were nothing compared by what the muslims had done and were still doing.
The People's Crusade was equipped with very similar equipment as the Prince's Crusade, it's also the reason why Arslan was so stunned by how strong the second invasion was.
It was so sad, to hear, how easy that army was gone. They come nowhere and dream of salvation in Jerusalem. 20.000 insane just gone, just like that because they were not organized.
@@NO1jkpg I thought it was sad to hear how they massacred innocent cities and Jewish populations. I actually smiled and laughed when BazBattles said that army got annihilated without trouble
Overall great video, but i feel the "no major friction" part and lacking to mentioning the Muslim invasions prior to the Crusades into Europe as a "popular" reason to join the Crusades are missing out on some much needed detail to address.
You have my highest respect just for being polite while pointing out those historical inaccuracies. Other people in the comments seem to not be able to do that...
Unfortunately, it's not considered acceptable in this day and age to accurately portray history in any way that makes the religious European ideals justified in anything they did.
....Simply because IF there were supposedly occurrences but these were just "occurrences" these events (friction(s) & invasion of Muslims) does not register a big mark on THAT time & in magnitude unlike Crusaders infighting, attacking indiscriminately & invasions etc.
Alexios was like "hey pope, can u help us get rid of the seljuks? maybe take the holy land on the way? come on, i know u want to take back the holy land". And the pope was like "yes, i do actually want to do that. Let's do a crusade". Anyone know where it from?
I mean I guess he could also leave out the fact that the turks were constantly raiding and attacking the west before that time. The american slave trade pales in comparison to the Ottoman slave trade
Kind of funny how whenever politics were getting to heated in medieval europe, everyone would just go on a crusade as if it was a vacation. Imagine if we did that nowadays: "Well, this impeachment business is a little too spicy. Time for a crusade!"
He leans in to my ear. "Hail Hydra." He whispers with a small smile. "Cute." I say with a smirk. I lean into his ear and whisper in reply. "Deus Vult."
Your videos are of great quality, both in presentation and information. Each time one is released, I become excited. I find myself making more time ,investing in getting popcorn or other snacks, to enjoy the video more. With much delight I look forward to the next video! Deus vult. :)
Guys, no friction means no friction by those days standards. The same way that saying the ancient Egyptians had advanced math implies that it was advanced to the ancient day's standards.
Any attack on ANY religion was considered the worst thing you could do back then. So any attack on anything of religion was MAJOR friction and the worse kind.
@@mouhammedainine3619 Yes, actually. All these men did were write books that didn't even try to deny religion or anything but they were punished for writing. All taking place before or little after. This is also just an example of 3 men who only wrote books. There are many more and much worse cases. __Rhazes (865-925) __ Muhammad ibn Zakariyā Rāzī or Rhazes was a medical pioneer from Baghdad who lived between 860 and 932 AD. He was responsible for introducing western teachings, rational thought and the works of Hippocrates and Galen to the Arabic world. One of his books, Continens Liber, was a compendium of everything known about medicine. The book made him famous, but offended a Muslim priest who ordered the doctor to be beaten over the head with his own manuscript, which caused him to go blind, preventing him from future practice. __Michael Servetus (1511-1553) __ Servetus was a Spanish physician credited with discovering pulmonary circulation. He wrote a book, which outlined his discovery along with his ideas about reforming Christianity - it was deemed to be heretical. He escaped from Spain and the Catholic Inquisition but came up against the Protestant Inquisition in Switzerland, who held him in equal disregard. Under orders from John Calvin, Servetus was arrested, tortured and burned at the stake on the shores of Lake Geneva - copies of his book were accompanied for good measure. Galileo (1564-1642) The Italian astronomer and physicist Galileo Galilei was trialled and convicted in 1633 for publishing his evidence that supported the Copernican theory that the Earth revolves around the Sun. His research was instantly criticized by the Catholic Church for going against the established scripture that places Earth and not the Sun at the center of the universe. Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy" for his heliocentric views and was required to "abjure, curse and detest" his opinions. He was sentenced to house arrest, where he remained for the rest of his life and his offending texts were banned.
Correct me if i am wrong, but wasn´t the fact that the seljuks were quiet bad to the christians on the holy land one of the reasons why the crusade was called?
They were as tolerant as any invader could be, by paying a fare you could just believe whatever you wanted. The sultans knew that avoiding unrest and revolts was not gained through harsh treatment, all the locals were Christian, so it was a good idea to just let them be, but the initial conquest was rough, and Europe feared further expansion into the West. (Wich would have probably happened). So all it took was a pope to call the arms. Plus, medieval lords loved dat loot.
""hey pope, can you help us get rid of the seljuks? maybe take back the holy land on the way? come on, i know you want to take back the holy land." "yes, i do actually want to do that. let's do a crusade." crusade!
Could you do videos on Stirling Bridge and Falkirk? The movie Braveheart has given the public the wrong impressions of those battles. Thanks for the great videos.
@Katarina Love In reality Wallace was able to destroy his opponent (who had beter training, equipment and larger numbers) by trapping a large part of them on muddy terrain between his army and the river. In the movie he used this amazing new invention: THE POINTY STICK. (Not even real spears, just sharpened sticks fresh from the tree.)
4:45 Gofrey was born in Boulogne and ruled over Lorraine (somewhere left of the "R" of "Roman" on the map), not Bavaria or whatever you have him point at.
@@liljs4189 The Eastern part of the Roman Empire was always more Greek than Latin. Roman Empire in general was Greek on a very big part. Northern invaders who conquered the west weren't though and that's why we have the image of a Latin only Roman Empire. Nobody from the west wanted to anyone believe the Empire still existed on the east.
Yeah, but that was all on the level, political stuff. The level of infighting within polities of each religious group (when such polities existed) was usually equivalent or greater in the time period being described.
Hope915 There was major friction at every level of society. All three of these religions identities are premised on the others being wrong. All three believed they were a chosen people
30,000 crusaders hardly beating 8,000 Seljuk Turks...not bad! And the crusaders even lost more. Add to this, the defeat and capture of Bohemond in 1100, the disastrous crusades of 1101, and the disastrous battle of Harran in 1104, and you'll know that the Seljuk Turks were the greatest warriors at that time. In land warfare, no soldier, whether Frank, Byzantine, Armenian, or even other Muslims could've matched the Turks back then.
ScarFail although in the battle of manzikert the byzantines fought against seltzuk turks ,I cant deny the fact tha both seljuks and ottomans come from the same place.be more accurate my friend.
Of course they had to find a way to give more rights to the majority that they had conquered and in many cases brutally killed raped beaten and forced to convert.
this is true Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult
falco81dist it's a detail but I think it was "DEUS LO VULT" and not "DEUS VULT". Same meaning but in a more "familiar" form more likely to be used back then...
it's the same except muslims still use islam to influence their every day life and we dont because we won and muslims are at near bottom of existing cultures.
Claiming that there were no "friction" in Jerusalem when islamists were in control of the city is like saying there is no "friction" between isis and Christians.
Arm3nia91 Those where different times. Before the crusades, Islam was considered to be just a hieretical branch of Christianity... So just a bunch of people believing in similar stuff. The conflict arose from more political reasons, the nobles of Europe feared a change in the balance of power, since sultanated were quite the warmongers and Byzantium was a chill and diplomatic...
I noticed an error in the video: 1:31, on the map about the Catholic and Orthodox Europe, the Carpathian mountains were the border between the two denominations and not middle Hungary. the whole Hungary was a Catholic state from 1000 AD. You should'd draw the line on the Eastern and Southern Carpathian mountains. At least the Hungarian history books write that the Hungarian king Kálmán I beat the hell out of the peasant crusaders, after they started to plunder his realm, and as result only a part of the crusaders continued their march towards Constantinople. I like the Hungarian curses you wrote. :D
Kind of a ultra-simplistic explanation of why Europe was so enthusiastic for the Crusades. They were sick and tired of 400 years of Islamic expansion, enslavement and slaughter.
Almost everything you say around 2:00 is essentially wrong. There was peacefull coexistence under the fatimids since 970, that is true. But the seldjuk turks conquered Jerusalem in 1078 and massacred the entire population. They then enslaved the remaining christians in the middle-east and systematically massacred all western-christian and byzantine pilgrims. Anyway, I hope you do some other crusader battles, like the two sieges of Antiocha, the battle of Montgisard and the battle of Hattin
Saracens had heavy cavalry. This idea that they are all just horse archers is false, although many were. The East has known of heavy armor for a long time since the age of Cataphracts from Persia. A fully armored knight is essentially impervious to arrows anyway, even with just chainmail.
Kasushi yes they had light armor and heavy armor. People like to exaggerate the difference between Eastern and Western armor because it creates this interesting battle between different fighting styles. Although yes they were different, they weren't that different. Both had light and heavy armor.
Good video, but I don't like a few things: - the crusades being called 'unprecedented string of glorious and brutal events in the name of god': simply no true - the peaceful coexistence of the three religions: non-muslims had to pay an extra tax and endure humiliation The Seljuk Turks made pelgrimage to the holy land impossible, and the spread of Islam was something to worry about. Don't forget, they were already in the Iberian peninsula and suddenly it was spreading westward. Don't call the crusades especially brutal, they weren't. It was simply war, and war has its vile moments (for either side). The space they eventually occupied was very little compared to what the muslims had. It was modern day Israel, Lebanon and Antioch.
Important to note that Islamic control over the Palestine was no homogeneous from its conquest in the 7th century until 1099. Various Caliphates fought over it.
Burak Danişmend I mean it was more like 10k ambushed and encircled troops vs 8k horse archers until the main force came in and just routed the seljuks. Ofc it was a pyrrhic victory, the video just explained why they took the risk.
@kim jong un the Seljuks were facing an army much larger in size and heavier in armor, guess who were "pussies" you fucking moron. The Seljuks had to weaken them with horse archery before bulldozing them, like the Parthians did in Carhae centuries ago. You pussies praise Scythians (whom you have nothing to do with) who used the same steppe tactics, the Huns conquered the continent of pussies (aka Europe) using the same tactics.
"With the powerful phrase Deus vult" that man never thought he'd become a meme.
DEUS VULT
Who thought this generation would be so ridiculous?
@@pavelmachytka5604 th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
@@punsher5254 th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
"It's worth noting, that both sides were surprised by the other's combat potential." Indeed they are. They presented a traditional, centuries old steppe warfare like Scythians and Huns did before them. Its been reported that the Turkish Horse Archers felt like wtf when their composite bow did much less damage to these new enemies. So much so they hesitated about where to aim to kill these men of iron. I watched this video before but did it again because of its detailed and amazing narrative, great job BazBattles!
Marcus Licinius Crassus at Carrhae, yeah, am i a joke to you?
Battle of Brenta they say the same thing "first time Westerners experienced eastern warfare style"
Each time they repeat themselves about Western and eastern warfare meeting
That sucks with the eastern way, you are on a horse you shoot an arrow and you flee, WTH!?
Glad to not come from an eastern warfare style civilization, thx God i am a Westerner
Gunpowder was also an Eastern invention :)
@@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 East have always been superior society in everything including warfare till 18th century. They have developed much better technology, war tactics, generals etc. That's why Eastern history is a lot richer than Western. Amount of proper battles between strong armies, amount of dynasties, empires, religious sects, games for thrones women being major figure etc. are considerably higher. And First crusade would've surely failed if Seljuq Empire wasn't in disintegration period after death of Malik Shah.
Remember Fatimids were uncapable state which was ruled through an ideology and couldn't hold any half decent campaign against Seljuqs on the battlefield.
@@turalf.9039 well and by this logic, Byzantium would had not fallen without inside instability neither, do you even know that the battle of manzikert is not the direct consequence? Most of the troops didn't even fought, and there was a dynastic crisis, which led anatolia open to conquest, with barely no opposition. In the same way the Crusaders (first crusade) were able to advance quickly because the seljuk barons helped crusaders against their own kin, they knew if they regrouped , the neighbor would attack them while they go on campaign
@@turalf.9039 The history of the East is richer? I think you're mistaken, but I can't be sure because I don't know what you qualify as the East or as richer. When looking at what people consider to be the East it's only like 30 countries. Not only that, but a lot of their history has been obliterated over time; maybe a lot more is lost. If you're counting lost history as part of the richer history, I think pre-17 century North/South American history might also has a lot as well. Still, I just don't see how anything can even come close to matching Mediterranean history. They were exceptional record keepers.
I clicked on the video faster than the destruction of the People's Crusade
DAMN
Nine Tailed Box so within 1 year then. #killedthejoke
ed4pints #killedthecrusaders
Nine Tailed Box lol
I clicked faster than the enslavement of the children's crusade.
Holy shit these crusaders must have been tough guys. Just the amount of miles they marched with full gear is astounding, right through the hottest parts and surrounded by enemies...gotta have massive balls and stamina to do that!
And went to fight the Muslims armies which were fenomenal.
The crusaders morale was high for numerous reasons it’s entertaining to me
@@ericsandrade th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
@@okishira927 th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
@Mighty-Light the quran is an joke
The people’s crusade is literally the equivalent to storming Area 51
Did they Naruto run tho?
Austin Nieves I don’t think they plan on holding the base for a long time.
@@tancreddehauteville9983 The point is that without a good leadership or coordination, team work is doomed to fail.
Don't you mean the Area 51 Massacre?
Except the raid of area 51 wont happen
13:09 : Why let a little bit a raiding stand in the way of a good crusade.
\[T]/ -Praise the sun!- Deus Vult!
They were an unorganized band of brigands
Why let ___ get in the way of a good crusade?!?
its called revenge
DEUS VULT
you are finally tackling the crusades!!! awesome
taggling? do you mean tackling
fixed! thanks for letting me know :)
maybe but i find it interesting nonetheless
Just because they were fraught with failures doesn't mean they were not interesting. In fact that's what makes them *more* interesting to some people.
Actually because in those ages you wouldn't need to wear a cloak waiting in an alley heat the hijabi just passing with a club and run. You could massacre all her family, struggle her while raping her and be considered a hero. Those were good ages. ;)
Im hungarian and goddamnit i laughed so bloody hard when i saw "baszd meg magad" which literally means 'go f**k yourself' :) little touches like this is why i love your content man, keep up the good work! :)
I actually took the time to... *pause the video....that's not it... then got to google translate to find out and it told me to "go f**k yourself"* ...definitely worth it...
It was also nice to hear the correct pronunciation of the country. HungAry and not "Hungry" like "I'm hungry".
Lol that's funny
Dániel Simon please let’s refrain from abusive language
Thank you
@@shahzaibabuomar baszd meg magad
The Battle of Dorylaeum was certainly an important battle as it was the first major pitched battle of the crusades.
Lord Voldemort In a way, the major battles of the First Crusade could be compared to the major battles of the Original Star Wars Trilogy. Dorylaeum was the First Crusade's Yavin, Antioch was Hoth, and Jerusalem was Endor.
@@kevinnorwood8782 and the battle after jerusalem the battle of jakku
@@julioputin3674 Now that I think about it, that actually sounds pretty appropriate.
@@kevinnorwood8782 yeah ascalon
@@kevinnorwood8782 Star Wars wanker.
The research, the analysis and the effort put in these videos are stunning!
-A History graduate here
"The three major religions coexisted with no major friction" I see there is no mention of the destruction of the Holy Sepulchre.
Excellent point.
You mean the church that was destroyed 90 years before the crusaders arrived and was rebuild 50 years before the crusaders arrived?
@@mathy1799 Yes, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
What is your point?
@@daviddavison2582 he was trying to imply that there isn't any friction because it's been "50 years" or somesuch, ignorant that the very fact that it was destroyed counters the orginal claim that there's "no major friction"
@@daviddavison2582 he means that Christians could also raze Mecca, pretending that nothing major happened. then some years later rebuild it and Christians be like "Its a prank bro"
No major friction?
The Fatimids had burned the Holy Sepulcher during the early years of the 11th century
Ups and downs may occur but you can't reject the fact that the fatemi dynasty was the most tolerant, accepted and loved Muslims dynasty, having major contributions in science, technology and literature
@@joonsuter9307 they took over a million people out of europe and made them slaves..where are you getting tolerant from?
slavery is not that big thing when it happens to europeans i guess
@@joonsuter9307 This golden age came from their piracy and pillaging of the Mediterranean sea trade, which in the past was safe for all. Muslim pirates enslaved many that came by. Many parts of Armenia were Christian and taken by force, pillaged, and enslaved as well. Muslims slowly took more land and encroached the Spanish lands on the west. Tell me where the Fatimid tolerance is coming from?
I friggin love these series and the way they are presented (historic, maps, with graphics.) These are perfect - not too much information and not too little, just enough. Congrats to you all.
True great history th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
Regarding the actual situation in the holy land. While its true that jerusalem fell almost 400 years earlier, its also important to know that islam is not a homogeneous organization. Shi'a muslims of the fatimid dynasty were constantly at war with sunni Seljik turks, who took and retook jerusalem from each other several times, creating enormous instability in the land. The Fatimid Caliph ordered the destruction of all churches in jerusalem at some point in the 11th century. Around the same time, that same caliph also banned the celebration of easter, and the use of wine. Raids on christians as well as muslims from the warfare were commonplace. Christian pilgrims were often attacked on the roads.
The statement that I hear often that life was all peachy for all religious minorities in the levant prior to the first crusade is false. Its an attempt to push islam as a wonderful religion while Catholicism as aggressors. The truth is alot more complicated than that. Sure there were a variety of factors, both political and religious behind the crusades. But defending christians and their ability to visit the holiest sites are most certainly a major factor and not one to be dismissed offhand.
It is even a topic of discussion that whether the religious part of the crusade was actually the primary objective or just a kind of propaganda to make people join it
Well said.
I have been suspicious of this for some time and i've seen a lot of mentions of how kind islamics are to non-islamics even in games
I just find it ironic, how people in the far right have seemed to by the false narrative... They have so much of their platform these days based around the stupidity of the Muslim immigration, the terrible nature of Islam, etc... And then simultaneously agree with them whenever it deals with Jews or Israel really. Strange to see Islam and the alt-right become the best of bedfellows.
The statement about coexisting religions is a false one. Non muslims had to pay protection money to be able to stay christian or jewish. They had to wear indications of their religion so they were publicly displayed as lesser than a muslim. Enter the yellow star. Non muslims were bullied and abused. Pilgrims often attacked and killed on the roads. The crusades were a direct response on muslim behaviour. How dare you speak of christian atrocities while these were nothing compared by what the muslims had done and were still doing.
great material and presentation, loving the map, cities and armies and how you guys portrait them!
The People's Crusade was equipped with very similar equipment as the Prince's Crusade, it's also the reason why Arslan was so stunned by how strong the second invasion was.
It was so sad, to hear, how easy that army was gone. They come nowhere and dream of salvation in Jerusalem. 20.000 insane just gone, just like that because they were not organized.
@@NO1jkpg I thought it was sad to hear how they massacred innocent cities and Jewish populations. I actually smiled and laughed when BazBattles said that army got annihilated without trouble
I love this channel, great content, great visuals, decisive and doesn’t bog down with side bar info. Keep this up!
"One cannot underestimate the power of words used at the right time and the right place" very wise, very wise indeed
Superb! best informative video ive seen on the crusades so far, cant wait for the next installment.
almost 100K!
I can remember this channel being 10K just a few month ago. The growth is spectacular!
Overall great video, but i feel the "no major friction" part and lacking to mentioning the Muslim invasions prior to the Crusades into Europe as a "popular" reason to join the Crusades are missing out on some much needed detail to address.
You have my highest respect just for being polite while pointing out those historical inaccuracies. Other people in the comments seem to not be able to do that...
Carnifex |Ger| thank you!
Unfortunately, it's not considered acceptable in this day and age to accurately portray history in any way that makes the religious European ideals justified in anything they did.
....Simply because IF there were supposedly occurrences but these were just "occurrences" these events (friction(s) & invasion of Muslims) does not register a big mark on THAT time & in magnitude unlike Crusaders infighting, attacking indiscriminately & invasions etc.
Gotta bend the knee to the Muslims and leftist narrative lest your youtube vids be demonetized.
Good work BazBattles, truly amazing and informative content. Thank you!
Alexios was like "hey pope, can u help us get rid of the seljuks? maybe take the holy land on the way? come on, i know u want to take back the holy land".
And the pope was like "yes, i do actually want to do that. Let's do a crusade".
Anyone know where it from?
It's the history of the world, I guess
Keneki For The Win enlighten us
This comment is only here so that I can see you write comments.
It has no other purpose.
David vsm yup
I mean I guess he could also leave out the fact that the turks were constantly raiding and attacking the west before that time. The american slave trade pales in comparison to the Ottoman slave trade
Bohemond was the best commander of the crusaders and to his credit he would adopt some of the tactics of the turks
The best commander/leader was imo Roger of Salerno, also most caring about his people i think
@gltsry04 bohemond was captured by turks battle at melitene(battle of melitene)
@gltsry04 No he wasn’t. He died of old age
@@Morphologicallyy th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
Thank you so much. The best explanation of the battle EVER !
Superficial historical background of First Crusade, good description of battle
why let the excomunication of your brother get in the way of a good crusade !!!
#ExtraCredits
Kind of funny how whenever politics were getting to heated in medieval europe, everyone would just go on a crusade as if it was a vacation. Imagine if we did that nowadays:
"Well, this impeachment business is a little too spicy. Time for a crusade!"
i love this channel ...accurate ,informative and non-biased
@Irish Patriot snowflake
@Irish Patriot Angry Greek lover detected.
Man these videos are pure gold!
A comment about the quality of the vid? Are you sure you're not lost, sir?
Sees a video about the crusade
*gets popcorn*
Time to go through these comments.
He leans in to my ear. "Hail Hydra." He whispers with a small smile.
"Cute." I say with a smirk. I lean into his ear and whisper in reply.
"Deus Vult."
God damn this was a great video.
Holly shit Sargon! keep up the good fight buddy :)
Did your dumbass make it past minute 5?
instaBlaster
The best overhead battle teacher on you tube hands down!
Your videos are of great quality, both in presentation and information. Each time one is released, I become excited. I find myself making more time ,investing in getting popcorn or other snacks, to enjoy the video more. With much delight I look forward to the next video! Deus vult. :)
Guys, no friction means no friction by those days standards. The same way that saying the ancient Egyptians had advanced math implies that it was advanced to the ancient day's standards.
NO. Their math was SO GOOD that they passed it to the Greeks by trade and to the West eventually.
The OP and the first comment reminds me of the Rick and Morty episode where Jerry-clones congratulate each other.
Any attack on ANY religion was considered the worst thing you could do back then. So any attack on anything of religion was MAJOR friction and the worse kind.
@@dap3051 no
@@mouhammedainine3619
Yes, actually. All these men did were write books that didn't even try to deny religion or anything but they were punished for writing. All taking place before or little after. This is also just an example of 3 men who only wrote books. There are many more and much worse cases.
__Rhazes (865-925)
__ Muhammad ibn Zakariyā Rāzī or Rhazes was a medical pioneer from Baghdad who lived between 860 and 932 AD. He was responsible for introducing western teachings, rational thought and the works of Hippocrates and Galen to the Arabic world. One of his books, Continens Liber, was a compendium of everything known about medicine. The book made him famous, but offended a Muslim priest who ordered the doctor to be beaten over the head with his own manuscript, which caused him to go blind, preventing him from future practice.
__Michael Servetus (1511-1553)
__ Servetus was a Spanish physician credited with discovering pulmonary circulation. He wrote a book, which outlined his discovery along with his ideas about reforming Christianity - it was deemed to be heretical. He escaped from Spain and the Catholic Inquisition but came up against the Protestant Inquisition in Switzerland, who held him in equal disregard. Under orders from John Calvin, Servetus was arrested, tortured and burned at the stake on the shores of Lake Geneva - copies of his book were accompanied for good measure.
Galileo (1564-1642)
The Italian astronomer and physicist Galileo Galilei was trialled and convicted in 1633 for publishing his evidence that supported the Copernican theory that the Earth revolves around the Sun. His research was instantly criticized by the Catholic Church for going against the established scripture that places Earth and not the Sun at the center of the universe. Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy" for his heliocentric views and was required to "abjure, curse and detest" his opinions. He was sentenced to house arrest, where he remained for the rest of his life and his offending texts were banned.
8:38
We've been tricked, backstabbed and possibly bamboozled XI century version
Correct me if i am wrong, but wasn´t the fact that the seljuks were quiet bad to the christians on the holy land one of the reasons why the crusade was called?
They were as tolerant as any invader could be, by paying a fare you could just believe whatever you wanted. The sultans knew that avoiding unrest and revolts was not gained through harsh treatment, all the locals were Christian, so it was a good idea to just let them be, but the initial conquest was rough, and Europe feared further expansion into the West. (Wich would have probably happened). So all it took was a pope to call the arms. Plus, medieval lords loved dat loot.
@@pabloramos1022 Well spoken. I wish more people thought like you rather than screaming "DEUS VULT" all over the place.
Mrhomeless78 source or you are wrong.
I absolutely love your channel! I stumbled upon it by accident today and have watched all your videos since. Keep up the great work!
A well-made, objective video of an extraordinarily complex and controversial event, my salute to you!
Thanks th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
No don't go down there it's bad down there go back up to the video.
*DEUS* ... oh wait
i wish i listened to you but i didnt. I fell dead inside
παντελης μαρκογιαννακης
Because you got genocided by Turks
what you just said ,akes no sense
You're a GREEK, you should know about the Pontican genocide.
""hey pope, can you help us get rid of the seljuks? maybe take back the holy land on the way? come on, i know you want to take back the holy land."
"yes, i do actually want to do that. let's do a crusade."
crusade!
R/unexpectedbillwurtz
"They did many crusades, some of which almost didn't fail."
Could you do videos on Stirling Bridge and Falkirk? The movie Braveheart has given the public the wrong impressions of those battles.
Thanks for the great videos.
The battle of Stirling was on a bridge, not out in the open for one.
@Katarina Love In reality Wallace was able to destroy his opponent (who had beter training, equipment and larger numbers) by trapping a large part of them on muddy terrain between his army and the river. In the movie he used this amazing new invention: THE POINTY STICK.
(Not even real spears, just sharpened sticks fresh from the tree.)
@@mathy1799 th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
could watch those videos every day ... such a nice work, thx!
Exciting! So much videos can be made about crusades alone!
So many battles! So many victories on both sides!
judging by the comment section, The Crusades are still fresh for some people. #neverforget
"Bazd meg" :DDDD Thank you for using our language!!! I love your content!! Cheers from Hungary:D
Cheers from Poland! :)
@@michaobidzinski1125 th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
Deus Vult
Anyone care for another Crusade?
NO. we dont care for a crusade.
you guys so strong...
in case you come: turkeytravelguide.com/
Seems like Trump care... xD
Reasonable people dont care about a worthless strip of sand in the desert.
im happy you're starting to cover the first crusade, so many epic tales and battles
This account is the only reason im passing my classes
thank you.
Kılıç Arslan literally means Sword Lion :D
"The unprecedented string of both glorious and brutal events committed in the name of God is about to begin." that's just epic
Hey, I love your videos
At what point did the relief forces know that the battle was taking place?
I think they were just marching one infront of the other, with scouts and messengers exchange between the armies
@@ulrichleukam1068 th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
No idea how i got to this video. But was surprised with the quality of the content. Great work.
4:45 Gofrey was born in Boulogne and ruled over Lorraine (somewhere left of the "R" of "Roman" on the map), not Bavaria or whatever you have him point at.
did you mean the fall of the western roman empire? The Roman empire didn't fall until 1453
Yes
The roman empire got Split
They were more Greek than Roman at that point
@@liljs4189 The Eastern part of the Roman Empire was always more Greek than Latin. Roman Empire in general was Greek on a very big part. Northern invaders who conquered the west weren't though and that's why we have the image of a Latin only Roman Empire. Nobody from the west wanted to anyone believe the Empire still existed on the east.
"Baszd meg magad" :D
That was unexpected
I LOVE it!
it looks like "Total War" - The RTS-Game!
Yay another awesome video by bazbattles! :)
I love your vids, man! Keep on the quality work. ;)
The three major religions existed with “no major friction between them” just 400 years of constant warfare....
Yeah, but that was all on the level, political stuff. The level of infighting within polities of each religious group (when such polities existed) was usually equivalent or greater in the time period being described.
Hope915 There was major friction at every level of society. All three of these religions identities are premised on the others being wrong. All three believed they were a chosen people
Hope915 I would advise you against revisionism just because our modern goals are multicultural
Can you do Battle of Vaslui ( One of the Biggest Victories against the Ottomans ) , next ?
30,000 crusaders hardly beating 8,000 Seljuk Turks...not bad! And the crusaders even lost more. Add to this, the defeat and capture of Bohemond in 1100, the disastrous crusades of 1101, and the disastrous battle of Harran in 1104, and you'll know that the Seljuk Turks were the greatest warriors at that time. In land warfare, no soldier, whether Frank, Byzantine, Armenian, or even other Muslims could've matched the Turks back then.
Must be pretty cool sitting and putting archaeological and historical sources together under a umbrella of nice graphics
This channel is great man
"They did many crusades, some of which almost didn't fail"
Could you do some Ottoman Empire battles? Battle of Manzikert could be good too.
ScarFail although in the battle of manzikert the byzantines fought against seltzuk turks ,I cant deny the fact tha both seljuks and ottomans come from the same place.be more accurate my friend.
Make ''Battle of Manizkert''
this is the kind of a YT channel where you hit like before even watching the video. Thanks Baz!
Kılıç Arslan, Sultan of Anatolian Seljuk Sultanate was only 17 years old, while trying to stop the first crusade.
*Shoulder bashing intensifies*
fucking wardens
DAUBENY!!!
No major friction, what would you consider major friction.
No genocides
Of course they had to find a way to give more rights to the majority that they had conquered and in many cases brutally killed raped beaten and forced to convert.
Christians and Jews were in Dhimmitude under Muslim "peace", barely above slaves and bottom class citizens. Some peace.
Waiter: and what will you take?
...
Crusader: WE WILL TAKE JERUSALEM!!
DEUS VULT!!!!
You're a crusader Harry
The Muslims : just this once
@BazBattles waiting for the whole series on crusade battles. Good job
Keep doing what your doing man these videos are really cool
"It's a bird. It's a plane. It's the Seljiq Turk" "Aargh!!!"
JajajaJjajanaja
@@JLrapel492 th-cam.com/video/eL7BIGnj4SA/w-d-xo.html
3 religions living in peace? 😂 Nearly threw my back out laughing so hard😂😂
My username is this comment section
Deus vult DEUS VULT
this is true Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult Deus vult
There are no gods
@@theotterguy Your right, there’s only one true God. Deus Vult
@@theotterguy How do you know anyhow ? Ever heard of Pascal's Wager ?
Such good story telling. There has to be more material like this to cover even after all your videos today, surely?
Please continue with the 2nd and 3rd crusades, your videos are top class sir.
deus vult
falco81dist DEUS VULT
falco81dist pretending like it doesn't reek of the same ignorance as Allahuakbar
+Cool Dog a heretic is a dissident to church canon
a heathen or infidel is a member of another religion
ya dont know shit
falco81dist it's a detail but I think it was "DEUS LO VULT" and not "DEUS VULT". Same meaning but in a more "familiar" form more likely to be used back then...
it's the same except muslims still use islam to influence their every day life and we dont because we won and muslims are at near bottom of existing cultures.
Claiming that there were no "friction" in Jerusalem when islamists were in control of the city is like saying there is no "friction" between isis and Christians.
Arm3nia91 Those where different times. Before the crusades, Islam was considered to be just a hieretical branch of Christianity... So just a bunch of people believing in similar stuff. The conflict arose from more political reasons, the nobles of Europe feared a change in the balance of power, since sultanated were quite the warmongers and Byzantium was a chill and diplomatic...
You're not too smart
*"Deus Vult"* Which soon became a motto of the upcoming Crusade.
Also a meme a millennium afterward.
I freaking love your videos! Especially while im high by weed, for some reason... Thanks!
I noticed an error in the video: 1:31, on the map about the Catholic and Orthodox Europe, the Carpathian mountains were the border between the two denominations and not middle Hungary. the whole Hungary was a Catholic state from 1000 AD. You should'd draw the line on the Eastern and Southern Carpathian mountains.
At least the Hungarian history books write that the Hungarian king Kálmán I beat the hell out of the peasant crusaders, after they started to plunder his realm, and as result only a part of the crusaders continued their march towards Constantinople.
I like the Hungarian curses you wrote. :D
Kind of a ultra-simplistic explanation of why Europe was so enthusiastic for the Crusades. They were sick and tired of 400 years of Islamic expansion, enslavement and slaughter.
lmao ok crowderhead
Yes, tell that to christians they slaughtered.
*"It's the seljuk turks!"* "Aah!"
DEUS VULT!
bruce lee
Deus vult!
whats does it means? god wills it? dieu le veut?
Yes, god wills it
There are no gods
@@theotterguy *CRUSADERS WANT TO KNOW YOUR LOCATION*
Well done! Any chance you are working on other crusades?
Awesome videos dude. Keep up the great work!
Filipino Christian Deus Vult 💓🙏
Jessei Mae Sy deus vult pañero
Nothing to be be proud about your people being raped and forced converted.
@@doublem1975x Really man? Is that relevant?
@@dominicguye8058 Yes, yes it is.
"no major friction"
come on guys
@@shareefqb and yet it had nothing to do with religion ? You're contradicting yourself in less than 2 sentences lmao
Almost everything you say around 2:00 is essentially wrong.
There was peacefull coexistence under the fatimids since 970, that is true. But the seldjuk turks conquered Jerusalem in 1078 and massacred the entire population. They then enslaved the remaining christians in the middle-east and systematically massacred all western-christian and byzantine pilgrims.
Anyway, I hope you do some other crusader battles, like the two sieges of Antiocha, the battle of Montgisard and the battle of Hattin
I hope you continue making these videos about the crusades. I want to find out what happens next.
really good work every new video is better than the others
Saracens had heavy cavalry. This idea that they are all just horse archers is false, although many were. The East has known of heavy armor for a long time since the age of Cataphracts from Persia. A fully armored knight is essentially impervious to arrows anyway, even with just chainmail.
but we werent talking about saracens, we were talking about Seljuk turks?
Noah Sabouni Turkish troops used light armor , and used cavalry forces.
Chain mail isnt effective against arrows, which is why eastern armor has some plates on it
Kasushi yes they had light armor and heavy armor. People like to exaggerate the difference between Eastern and Western armor because it creates this interesting battle between different fighting styles. Although yes they were different, they weren't that different. Both had light and heavy armor.
Good video, but I don't like a few things:
- the crusades being called 'unprecedented string of glorious and brutal events in the name of god': simply no true
- the peaceful coexistence of the three religions: non-muslims had to pay an extra tax and endure humiliation
The Seljuk Turks made pelgrimage to the holy land impossible, and the spread of Islam was something to worry about. Don't forget, they were already in the Iberian peninsula and suddenly it was spreading westward.
Don't call the crusades especially brutal, they weren't. It was simply war, and war has its vile moments (for either side). The space they eventually occupied was very little compared to what the muslims had. It was modern day Israel, Lebanon and Antioch.
Muslims had to pay zakah and sadaqah
"No major friction" is a lie. Bazbattles lies.
What battery do crusaders use for their flashlights?
Deus Vult.
Important to note that Islamic control over the Palestine was no homogeneous from its conquest in the 7th century until 1099. Various Caliphates fought over it.
6,000/8.000 Turkish horsemen vs 40.000 Crusaders, and yet Crusaders suffered more casualties. What a great victory.
Random lol
Burak Danişmend I mean it was more like 10k ambushed and encircled troops vs 8k horse archers until the main force came in and just routed the seljuks. Ofc it was a pyrrhic victory, the video just explained why they took the risk.
@kim jong un the Seljuks were facing an army much larger in size and heavier in armor, guess who were "pussies" you fucking moron. The Seljuks had to weaken them with horse archery before bulldozing them, like the Parthians did in Carhae centuries ago. You pussies praise Scythians (whom you have nothing to do with) who used the same steppe tactics, the Huns conquered the continent of pussies (aka Europe) using the same tactics.
@@yazar6008 the huns never came further than Warsaw. So I wouldn't say they conquert europe.
@@antonworschech4133 Are you even serious? They even raided Gaul (what is now France).