The Siege of Jerusalem (1099)

[@Septimus_ii]

"The Crusaders were just sitting out there with no water and no food just kind of expecting the city to fall into their hands." Well, it kinda did!

[@rasterbate87]

And I’ll be dammed if it didn’t work for them.

[@SolZaer]

Dumb luck or divine timing?

[@apalsnerg]

@@SolZaer Divine luck!

[@Omar_ayach]

@@apalsnerg dumb timing!

[@apalsnerg]

@@Omar_ayach It's never a dumb time to reclaim the Holy Land.

[@MrGuyJacks]

3:00 After the successful siege of Jerusalem in 1099, Godfrey became the first ruler of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. He refused the title of King, however, as he believed that the true King of Jerusalem was Christ, preferring the title of Advocate (i.e. protector or defender) of the Holy Sepulchre (Latin: Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri). He is also known as the "Baron of the Holy Sepulchre" and the "Crusader King". However, Godfrey died the following year and his brother Baldwin who in 1098 became Count of Edessa rushed down to Jerusalem, and he had no problem being crowned king of Jerusalem.

[@OctavioMovies]

Fun fact of the day, the title of King of Jerusalem still exists and its currently held by the King of Spain.

[@MrGuyJacks]

@@OctavioMovies Interesting

[@emperorleroy6747]

@@OctavioMovies and the King of Spain holds the title of Roman Emperor!

[@tylerwhaley4872]

@@emperorleroy6747 eh, it's debatable

[@apalsnerg]

@@tylerwhaley4872 Didn't the last Byzantine emperor abdicate that title to the Spanish monarchy?

[@BobBob-cy9cu]

Would’ve been a lot easier if they had the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch

[@biscuitdoughhandsman7317]

How does it....how does it work?

[@kennethhargreaves9407]

Being naughty in thy site, they snuffed it

[@lucki4780]

The HHoA is only as good as the counting ability of the thrower- Book of armaments, chapter 5, verse 17

[@RomaInvicta202]

They had used prior to Jerusalem to defend themselves against hare

[@TheHilltopPillbox]

Brother Maynard was lagging behind...

[@jameshcjung6642]

The audio was so much better this time! And of course, informative content as usual.

[@TeddyParker]

The glorious mic upgrade of mid 2015. Somebody needs to find a way to edit the audio of his older videos to reduce the warbling fish bowl sound

[@glenson4402]

Benis

[@justfrankjustdank2538]

@@TeddyParker ^

[@justfrankjustdank2538]

@@glenson4402 blocked reported ignored, good job asshol

[@CollinBuckman]

Because you didn't say who led the Crusaders, I think I'll mention it Godfrey of Bouillon led the troops of the Duchy of Bouillon Robert II of Flanders led the Flemish troops Robert II of Normandy led the Norman troops and Raymond IV of Toulouse led, well, you get the idea.

[@Eonet99]

Also an important figure and commander was Bohemond of Taranto, who conquered, or rather, claimed Antioch.

[@bumperbonnie5721]

I find it funny that the English sided with Normandy, their conquerors. Make that Anglish.

[@Angelblue1302]

Don't forget Baldwin from the HRE who was off in Edessa.

[@globalcombattv]

Who did Raymond led? I don't get the idea...

[@Angelblue1302]

IF you are joking, LOL. If you are serious, he lead the men from Toulouse in Southern France(Near the Spanish Border)

[@oDPSo]

One of the only channels that I will watch every video put out. Please keep them up.

[@TheNinjaDwarfBiker]

You should do a series explaining all the crusades!

[@Tiktaalik]

+Loominarty and all the stupidity of killing over religion

[@AAARREUUUGHHHH]

cuttlefish It wasn't about religion in the way you say it. Learn history a little better before saying stupid things like that.

[@Tiktaalik]

DukeOfWellington The crusades not about religion... wow, stupidity 101. Just keep telling yourself that, maybe your religion will become better, whoops guess not there's tons of violence in the bible.

[@michaeldog123ful]

+cuttlefish The crusades were a wonderful thing where christians stopped fighting eachother and all came together to fight 1 common enemy who had been pushing them back for centuries. This brought together the idea of christendom and a united religion. Also the crusades were more than just these 8, it was an idea of unity. The baltic crusades, reconquista and the normans were all examples of crusades to defend against invaders

[@Tiktaalik]

michaeldog123ful You're wrong. Every man, woman, and child in Jerusalem didn't need to be slaughtered. www.scientificamerican.com/article/religious-experiences-shrink-part-of-brain/

[@bigboy8338]

I thoroughly enjoy your videos, it's great to have such detailed explanations of historically significant military achievements. I hope you keep it up!

[@mattsesar]

You do an amazing job with these videos - they're very informative but still easy to watch. I get a little antsy when Monday comes and we don't have a new video. Seriously, keep up the great work.

[@Croatz]

I like how you said they expected a Jericho situation, mocking the religious observances. Then in the next sentence talked of ships arriving at the perfect time. Sounds like a minor miracle to me.

[@zafelrede4884]

You can turn it around though. Was the fall of Jerusalem back into muslim hands also a miracle? God moves in mysterious ways. Meaning he doesn't exist and things just kinda happen.

[@24karatHAMSTER]

pls upload i just got here oh god pls upload ur vids are so good oh pls

[@chuddychudchud-wv5et]

Great video man! Keep up the good work

[@DirtyyMike]

Keep them coming! These videos are great and very fascinating. Thank you!

[@str8shooter744]

In depth tactics keep me coming back,the deeper the better, keep at it!

[@adeptus2714]

It would be great to see a video on the Siege of Antioch.

[@DIY_Miracle]

+huntmaster89 Or the holy hand grenade of Antioch. I really like that movie, sorry.

[@aarasheed]

I like how your videos are informative and short... Right to the point. Keep the great work up, salutes form Kuwait.

[@mon339]

The saracens did indeed cut down the trees around Jerusalem, so that the Crusaders won't have the resources to build assault towers and other assault machines. The crusaders even had to get to the Yafo port to buy a meditiranian ship to later dismantle it for wood.

[@TheDancingHyena]

*port of Jaffa

[@augustinedaudu9203]

Manu ben canar change sacrens to other soliders

[@soulwebsteve]

I have watched every single one of your videos. Keep up the good work!

[@Tyrkia123]

Battle of waterloo please

[@IjustwantKush]

+TheBoss YESSSSSS

[@toastmcporridge8069]

napoleon tried to make a frontal assault on the british/ dutch positions, couldn't get past the dutch advance guard, wasted his cavalry charging squares, then got flanked by the prussians

[@ericwilliams1832]

@@toastmcporridge8069 well ney ordered the Cavalry charge without Napoleon’s permission.

[@pfcreiben5244]

@@ericwilliams1832 and grouchy didn’t come to help

[@TheRaggedyDoctor11]

Just stumbled across your channel thanks to Vsauce and I really love the content. I've always loved the subject and you cover it really well. Might I suggest a look at the siege of Malta by the Ottomon empire, definitely outside your normal time period, but an interesting battle that changed how siege warfare was done by exposing the weaknesses of straight trenches. In any case, keep up the awesome content.

[@cormanec210]

Vsauce shouted Historia Civilis out?

[@johnshumate8112]

@@cormanec210 Yeah what video did this happen in?

[@BrandonBDN]

@@johnshumate8112 Wondering the same thing

[@marshalkrieg2664]

The Crusades were successful. They established Crusader states in the near east that lasted over a 100 years; they often secured safe passage for pilgrims to holy sites. They also probably saved Europe from a Muslim conquest when Saladin was checked by Richard the Lion Heart ( Saladin's world conquest ambitions are usually overlooked but but if he had met little resistance near his home base he most certainly would have launched an invasion of Greece and Italy.). Also remember, the Crusades were a response to earlier Muslim Arab invasions and conquests of former Christian lands.

[@FlymanMS]

Keep coping

[@pretzelstick320]

@@FlymanMS they weren’t a complete success but they certainly played a part in mitigating the spread of Islam to Europe. Had the crusades bot occupied the Muslim world for centuries, who knows if France or Italy would have remained Christian.

[@kingmaker2603]

You can even say that ottoman expansion towards west was also the result of crusades as they realized that if they don't attack europeans in there home they will come and attack us.

[@birdinmotion1525]

Found this channel by vsause, ive finally found a channel that tends to my intrest of ancient war tactics!!!

[@ShidaiTaino]

Don't look at the comments. DONT LOOK AT THE COMMENTS!

[@Ruairoquai]

People really need to stop saying this.

[@CeruleanHalo]

Don't look at the comments. DON'T LOOK AT THE COMMENTS!

[@abd-ar-rahmaniii5650]

Ruairoquai Don't look at the comments. DONT LOOK AT THE COMMENTS.

[@drghostboy8319]

sorry i looked :D

[@redreboot483]

Why not, those are fair criticisms.

[@poisonisFunguy182]

I love these videos, you are awesome dude

[@AAARREUUUGHHHH]

Blind luck? Or an act of God? Deus vult!

[@Laconic1]

Lmao, fuck your God. Of course, it wasn't an act of God when the Mongolians, Muslims or Persians made great conquests that swept the world. Same logic as a stupid football player who praises God after scoring a goal.

[@AAARREUUUGHHHH]

Alpha SSNP Mature, how old are you? No, I imagine it wasn't, it was the acts of great men. Men built themselves. But we're not talking about huge conquests here, we're talking about an army being saved by a miraculous event.

[@TheSonOfDumb]

+Alpha SSNP Stupid atheist can't take a goddamn joke.

[@heathhansen3292]

.

[@hamarbiljungskile8953]

+Alpha SSNP Is it a bird!? Is it a plane!? No! It is the joke flying over your head!

[@kargaroc386]

The weird period where the microphone quality was like modern HC, but the presentation was closer to the original videos.

[@Fawkes42]

... I don't think he's coming back...

[@darionsolaris]

He's alive.

[@Fawkes42]

Yep, never been happier to be wrong :)

[@peakperformancetrain]

Present every day in the mass.

[@spaghettisquad3028]

Don't know why he isn't uploading. I love his documentaries on battles.

[@numberad]

RIP Historia Civilis

[@ericsaullb]

dude this channel is good, I've seen all of your videos and loved them!! please don't let this die...

[@sheepwshotguns42]

Been a while since ur last video. Im a sad panda :(

[@jackjohn1255]

nice south park reference.

[@theb3rn7]

Seth Rich.

[@StoicFC]

This is in my top 3 favorite channels on KZbin. Please keep on making content!

[@Rayboblego]

The goal was not colonization it was reconquest

[@hannibalbarca8411]

hhhhhhh that's why they started beheading people when they took the city

[@Rayboblego]

game for arabe Im not saying that was right. The Muslims did that to the Christians and the Christians did that to the Muslims it was just the time but that doesnt change the fact that it was to reconquer lost land

[@mysticonthehill]

None of these people where ever citizen of the holy land so it was not reconquest. They even discriminated against local Christians rather then restore them. Historia Civilis it right it was all about second sons granting themselves fiefs.

[@kingmaker2603]

Reconquest from whom ? You do realize that most of population of muslims and jews living in Jerusalem were natives right ?

[@vorskulthedestroyer333]

Please Make more Videos, I love these, especially the ones about the Romans

[@InstigationFixation]

I'm going to have to disagree with you when you call it a colonization, my dude. Not only is that a loaded term these days, but it's not accurate since the Kingdom of Jerusalem wasn't subject to a mother country.

[@SvenElven]

For simplicity’s sake, I like to reserve the term “colonization” for conquests far overseas.

[@SolidRollin]

Wow, love these videos. Great job.

[@simonpeter5032]

Thank you for this! I love the crusades as a history topic.

[@ardaaksoy7651]

It is totally understandable that the commander of jerusalem cut down the trees outside the city to have a clear vision of what the enemy is doing, also it may prevent them building siege towers, catapults etc.

[@tsesarevich1835]

I will be more than happy to personally donate $100 if you decide to continue with these amazing videos, with a particular focus on Ancient Rome. You were doing so well... Please return!

[@Aussie-boi]

Did you?

[@SomeoneYouDontKnowOfficial]

Yeah I'm curious, but doubtful

[@360Flare]

"Colonisation" I'll assume you just forgot to mention the Muslim colonisation of the area in the 7th century and the 400 years of future attempted colonisations of Europe

[@malikbenslimane2873]

Don't blame anyone that's how the world works back then, just wars and colonizations everywhere

[@MrCmon113]

1. Colonization is different from expansion. 2. Conquests don't annihilate eachother. If I drive a car in one direction and another person drives a car in another direction, it's two cars being driven, not zero.

[@Cybermat47]

What does that have to do with a video that only deals with the Siege of Jerusalem?

[@lionman4580]

Islamic Conquest of Europe Yes Colonisation No West Colonisation of 3 world yes not talk about Christian slavery of Africa and there 3 world subjects pleas go read real history or continue reading fation magazine's 😂

[@tomcole5118]

@@lionman4580 If what the muslims did in Europe was conquest then so was what the Christians did in the middle east. And if we want to talk about slavery let's also not ignore the Arab and barbary slave trades which saw around 15 million slaves imported into the Islamic world (which would generally castrate their slaves), slavery carried on in the Muslim world for far longer as well (until the 1960s while Britain outlawed slavery throughout her Empire in 1833 and America in 1865)

[@mogwaidimanno5639]

The thing I like the most about you, over a thousands of that obviously, your content is amazing and divulgative. Is that you don't forget to mention the barbaric essence, the crimes, which to often hyrstoricals forget in the passion they put into the narration of an event. Keep going man, waiting for your next video about Antonio and his wars on est 😉

[@ShowTheOreo]

More battle videos please! They're awesome I love em

[@Olly07]

At 3:29, Weren't the English part of the Crusades? (sorry, History newbie here)

[@robertwilliams4682]

Not really in the First Crusade. But the English monarchy was involved in later crusades, most famously the Third. However, most Crusaders (especially in the First Crusade) were Franks who hailed from modern day France.

[@soapbrick9482]

There were yes but the leaders weren’t in the 1st crusade but the soldiers/knights mainly came from England France and Germany

[@Olly07]

@@soapbrick9482 Any idea why the English leaders chose not to participate?

[@weebslayer3411]

Sheer luck? *BLASPHEMY!!! 'TWAS GOD'S WILL* *DEUS VULT*

[@RGP43_]

WeebSlayer lmaoo

[@TheFlameOfHeaven]

Please! keep going with this videos!

[@62peppe62]

1-The Crusades were not a form of colonization. Colonization is about conquering foreign lands in order to exploit them economically. The Crusades did not bring about signbificant if any economical benefit to the crusaders. Christian kings were always reluctant to answer the the Pope's call for the crusades because it was waste of time and money and distracted the kings' efforts from their main political interests which were in their homeland, threttened by internal and external local enemies. No king was involved in the first crusade, few kings provided significant support for the following ones without paying a prize for it and the crusader kingdoms could only count on the help of faithfull volontiers. This tells what was the real reason of the Crusades: The Crusades were a christian response the the islamic aggression since the 7th century which conquered the christian lands of the Middle East and North Africa and threatened Christian Europe, and which was stopped in the 9th century by the Franks at Poitiers, by the italian Sea Republics in Ostia (after Rome being sieged and Saint Peter Cathedral plundered) and by the Bysantine empire. The latter , in 1071, suffered a crushing defeat in the battle of Manzikert, and the conquest of Costantinople by the muslims was a real therat to all Christianity because it would open the doors of Europe to islamic invasion. This toghether with the protection of christian pillgrims to the Holy Land, is the reason of the first and the following Crusades. 2-The crusades were a success. As long as the crusades took place Christian Europe suffered no more threats of islamic conquest, on the contrary, Christian lands , as Siciy Spain and Portugal, were recaptured, in spite of the loss of the Holy Land. It was only in the 16th century, when the spirit of the Crusades had completely faded away, that the islamic aggression took place again with success, conquering Costantinople and invading Europe and western Mediterranean Sea and again thereatening to conquere Rome, only stopped in Lepanto and Vienna. It is not a coincidence that this happened when European Christianity was in crisis and divided by protestantism. 3-Crusades did go on for centuries as long as Christianity was strong in Europe. European colonialism did actually start after the end of the crusading era, when Christianity was less and less a concern for European governments.

[@heathhansen3292]

+62peppe62 10/10 well said.

[@CaptainHaddocck]

Analyzing Male Slavery go back to reading picture books imbecile.

[@freethebrain]

The Ottomans successfully invaded Europe in the 14th and 15th centuries - not the 16th. Also, the Arab invasions of the 9th century weren't stopped solely by the Byzantines in the Balkans. A huge contribution lay with the Bulgarian Kingdom and their khan Tervel, who was crowned caesar by Justinian II for aiding the Byzantines during the Second Arab Siege of Constantinople. It was basically the Bulgarians that broke the siege.

[@axelandersson6314]

62peppe62 That definition would make England a French colony after the Normans Blois and Angevins.

[@Timon-IrishFolk]

What you are saying is completely and utterly wrong. The whole thing. The pope called for the crusade mainly because there was a proclaimed anti-pope, the pope wasn't even in Rome at that point, he was in southern France, so he called the crusade for political leverage and because of the byzantine plea for help, to reclaim their lost lands in anatolia. Your second statement isn't true in the slightest, the Ottomans captured Constantinople in 1453, the crusader states fell in god damn 1291 and the seventh crusade was an utter failure. AFTER the crusades christian were harrassed in the holy land, the seljuks were quite tolerant towards pilgrims and different religions because of the islamic tax on people of different faiths, the Ottomans however practiced a school of Islam that saw glory in defeating whom they regarded as heathens. In places like Iberia Muslims and Christians, as well as jews lived side by side and created some one of the most impressive, tolerant and advanced state of their time which was destroyed by the reconquista and henceforth the spanish inquisition. Islam also almost had a reformation but guess what, because of the power vacuum the ottomans used to take power and consequently the European powers keeping the dying Ottomans around for their own benefit, the Ottomans out down any form of Reformation in the islamic faith. Onto the third claim which is even a step worse. You are defining colonization as “bad term we used in history class once, which I dislike“. The greeks had colonies for example in southern Italy, the English colonized Ireland, the Russians colonized Siberia, the Romans colonized gaul. European colonialism started mainly because the europeans wanted to find new trading routes because a certain Ottoman Empire shut down trade with the europeans (except for.. like Venice) so they discovered new land and then discovored how perfectly one could take advantage of that land, one of the biggest colonizers was spain, in the name of christ, btw. Spain was one of the most devoutly christian nations in the world at that point. There is no neutral history, all sides always act out of self-interest not because of character or moral values.

[@nils4279]

9 year ago bro youve come a long way

[@numberad]

DONG ARMY INCOMMING!!!! FIX BAYONETS!!!

[@stoppi89]

+Numberad Yes but this channel might already be dead

[@numberad]

true

[@numberad]

+Stoppi RIP Historia Civilis

[@dariuso2657]

+Numberad Why is it dead? Is creator busy or just abandoned it alltogether?

[@numberad]

yes

[@skullcyber35]

I subscribed cause this is so interesting, also why does it says you have no subs when some of your videos get 60k?

[@gigatroller]

Hey I like your vids! Are there new coming soon?

[@samirasheed9486]

it's been six months we need more!!

[@RafaelCosta-oi3be]

This channel is very good for the Antiguity stuff, mostly, but his bias and lack of knowledge in this video just makes it entirely useless. If you want something better, Real Crusades History has decent material, although still mostly for entertainment and not really scholarly (it provides good book indications though).

[@l.c.7445]

I couldn't have said better.

[@stephenfosterdublin]

Gosh I hope you do something soon

[@ipuntturtlezz4632]

It wasn't a failed colonization and many historians will tell you so.

[@yugdaBretsiM]

Man this channel is amazing. Such a shame it seems to have been given up on, I would have loved to seen a take on the Roman invasion of Britian ( I'm a Boudicca and Celtic warfare fanboy )

[@yugdaBretsiM]

@Justin Goetz Lol 4 years later. Still, thanks for the heads up, I love this battle and I'm curious to his take :)

[@AliRadicali]

TBH I think the most important context regarding the crusades is the fact that there were several successful ones that we hardly ever hear about: The destruction of the cathars in southern france, the expulsion of the moors from Iberia and the brutal conversion of the pagan baltic states. It's rather ironic that the set of crusades that is most used to demonise medieval christianity is the one where they ultimately failed to genocide the other religion/sect out of existence.

[@owenb8636]

The crusaders are like every gambling addict who wins the first time and then chases their losses trying to replicate it

[@Summercamp1sland]

I mean it was them Trying to retake land the Muslim took from them

[@kazukikjp]

@@Summercamp1sland he made a joke and u took it way to seriously lmfao

[@Summercamp1sland]

@@kazukikjp resllly because all I did was declare what the crusades were?

[@kazukikjp]

@@Summercamp1sland but it just wasn't needed, it was a small chuckle then cherry on comment. You are litteraly going through comments to be upset about things and the fact you have felt the need to state what the crusades were when it wasn't warranted really cements that. Also the fact you have commented on like another 20 comments which have 'interesting' statements

[@Summercamp1sland]

@@kazukikjp ok I corrected him and others on their false statements I do not see the problem I know what to it trying to do

[@CIA-M]

can you make a video like this about the battle of Grünwald? (Teutonic order vs Poland / lithouania)

[@BenadrylNumbercrunch]

i just marathoned all of your videos man, come back!

[@Lykyk]

I love your videos m8, but your quick summary of the crusades kinda sucks. Granted, it's hard to summarize a topic like that quickly, but even with that in mind it's horrible.

[@johnsnow6019]

Yes the proper audio begins

[@bosstoober8782]

A bunch of men stood around praying and then something happened which saved the campaign? Doesn't sound like luck to me

[@sevsquad]

Hey what happened? I noticed your patreon went down.

[@heathhansen3292]

As a student of a lot of this I agree with the vast majority of what you've said.. except one point. (Again, this is a single point of contention among piles of agreement) I'd add to the beginning (and perhaps it's just cuz it's a short video that it wasn't included) that the Crusades were technically a DEFENSIVE action. In defense of the Byzantines who called for aid (though this was NOT what they asked for). And a responsive action to Islamic expansionism all around the Mediterranean world for the last several hundred years. Not trying to do apologetic for the Crusades. Just remembering those things helps keep a better historical perspective of the situation. It wasn't just a bunch of douche bags saying "Let's colonize the holy land!". It also wasn't proto-colonialism as has been claimed in the past. The Crusader States stood on their own (for the most part) and were't exploited by outside powers like in the colonialist eras in the future. With all that said... Yeah... It may have been better all around if they'd lost. Especially being as the Egyptian Caliphate was in an alliance with the Byzantines and the Crusaders really took a crap on that.

[@crayon1202]

+Heath Hansen post modern idiot detected.

[@heathhansen3292]

+Cray On ? What about that was post modern?

[@Oldkingcole1125]

+Heath Hansen Nice comment. I'd also add that the violence of the soldiers during the sack was kinda normal for the time on all sides due to the decentralized command structure of armies at the time. Most armies were like multi-national coalitions rather than unified armies. Even the army of William the Conqueror at Hastings was more like a multi-national coalition than a unified army.

[@MrLuke3456]

You need to upload more battles! I love your videos. Great job!

[@TorricRoma]

it wasn't a colonization, it was a task of protecting Christians from Islamic persecution no European power had any sway over the holy lands, that would make it a colony, but the crusader states were separate from Europe and took no orders for Europe

[@jankubiak3218]

Guess who is now colonizing Europe....?

[@chilimacx9138]

+Jan Kubiak looks like its time for a second crusade. this time we needa finish the job

[@TorricRoma]

Chili Mac x be like the 9th crusade

[@dariuso2657]

"currently schools have been teaching kids that Crusaders were conquering murderers when in fact they were heroes who rose up to defend europa from the Islamic invasions." Because they didn't murder thousands of civilians and didn't go there to conquer land. Aha. Amazing theory. "left biased teaching" Yeah, seeing both sides as _"evil"_ is so much worse than demonizing one side and glorifying the other. Soooo sooo much worse.

[@chilimacx9138]

+Darius O the problem is that the crusades never wouldve happened of the islamics didnt invade europe. look at europe now, an islamic shithole. might as well call it eurabia.

[@eutropius2699]

This and The Teutorbourg forest video lack a lot of context and feel like weird offchutes as compared to the rest of History Civillis videos. Which follow patterns or storylines

[@1503nemanja]

It is a very amazing moment. So many things went their way against all odds, I am sure they saw it as a clear and undeniable sign from God. And honestly thinking about it? It's so crazy it well might have been Divine Intervention.

[@LOLERXP]

Or it was just a funny coincidence, like when the Persians conquered Constantinopolis because the defenders forgot to shut a backdoor in their wall. And honestly think about it? These things happen so often in all kinds of cultures it well might have been nothing but a coincidence. Oh wait... It WAS nothing but a coincidence, my bad.

[@davidkelly4210]

Or Saladine getting ready to abandoning Jerusalem only for Richard to mistake it for a mobilization and retreat. Probably the only time in history a routing army won a war.

[@kirill6850]

I see house lannister is doing well! (Banner with 2 lions is similar to the banner of family lannister in game of thrones)

[@praetorius2041]

This is the most pathetic battle I've ever seen

[@FlymanMS]

Wb Octavian vs Anthony in Greece?

[@Ben-ds3cm]

Brill video. Do you publish your sources?

[@kartoffelrossiya6363]

r.i.p. in kill historia civlis yuo will be miss

[@GiantsRTheBest1]

What happened to him?

[@zacharymohammadi]

@GiantsRTheBest1 he got captured by Caesar

[@nonameentered1918]

This is an excellent channel. I wish you would make more videos.

[@therupoe]

goddammit... of course I find this channel when it's dead.

[@MaxHammerleaf]

Same here ):

[@holdinmcgroin8639]

It's alive again as we speak

[@jdd4153]

Great videos! Do you use After Effects and Geolayers to create? Thanks

[@KalashnikovPaouzzi]

kinda weird knowing the first crusade was so poorly organised, but in the end was successful

[@krillissue]

But in another way, it was the perfect time to attack the muslim caliphates. They were disorganized and in the middle of fighting each other for...I dunno power and women and shit. The 1st crusade was kinda magical, but good timing played a good role Moral of the story is to disregard the other gender, acquire trebuchets

[@lemonvariable72]

Brian Mcbrian I actually think the reason it was disorganized is part of the same reason it was so successful. These were kings. Alot of those guys were unlanded sons and such, truly hungry to make a name.

[@Salha842]

@@krillissue To save time, Salahdin took the way across Mount Gisard (battle of hattin) ✌️

[@PolishPleb]

Could you make a video explaining how you make these? It seems interesting.

[@Meno678]

R.I.P. Historia Civilis

[@dl200010]

Suggestion for a video. The invasion of England in 1066 by William the Conquer. I have some family that was on the French side and would love to know more.

[@Eduardopaz-m4l]

Life lesson it ain’t over till the bell rings

[@Zilock64]

Dumb Luck? Or God's will? DEUS VULT!!!!

[@itsve8632]

god will to make saladin victories over the crusaderes

[@BrandonBDN]

@@itsve8632 Actual clown

[@itsve8632]

@@BrandonBDN Projecting much?

[@Dumpstermuffin1]

i think I remember reading that one of the bishops in the crusade claimed to find a holy relic and thinking that the holy relic would make them win, the crusaders tried to take the walls in their first attempt but failed

[@tada-kun982]

The Lance of Longinus! But there was already one in Rome 😂

[@Pfisiar22]

First of all, to many of the people in this comment thread: the Seljuk Turks did not actively persecute Christians. Were they second class citizens, sure. But note how the Pope didn't give a shit about this in the 300 years since the area was taken from the Byzantines. Second, the first crusade was the result of Alexus Komenos emperor of Byzantine asking for help in retaking territory he had recently lost. Third, the Byzantine emperor did not specifically ask for armies to fight the turks. He wanted gold and supplies mostly. THe idea of sending armies to the region were the result of the Pope at the time, who was engaged in a feud with the Holy Roman Empire at the time and was actually not even allowed into Rome at this point. The Pope very likely decided that a common cause to end this fued. Fourth, tales of atrocities came mostly from a homeless monk named Peter. And there's decent enough evidence to suggest that Peter never had been to the holy lands. Also, I'd like to point out that the Crusaders looted and pillaged CHRISTIAN cities on the way to the holy lands. Peter and his followers completely devestated parts of hungary. Same with Raymond's army. Beomund's army also had this issue. Not to mention the various anti-jewish things comitted by Count Emico under the pretext of Crusading.

[@alexgotyou4696]

Great video! However I would personally enjoy the videos which cover battles where formations, tactics etc play a role instead of a simple siege scenario. Possibly look into some of Napoleons battles or something like the Spartan stand against Persia.

[@antagonizerr]

The first crusade was actually a peasants crusade that spent more time looting christian towns than anything else. It's the second crusade that you're thinking of.

[@Deukish]

The "first" true Crusade was called the people's/peasant's/pauper's crusade, but was annihilated near Nicaea. Its generally considered to being a part of the overall First Crusade though.

[@davidkelly4210]

No, that was just the 1st wave that couldn't be bothered to wait for the armies to gather. It was still an answer to the same call to arms.

[@parthiancapitalist2733]

No....

[@MyOpinionIsFact]

Please sir... may we have some more....

[@mdtrw]

Historia Civilīs: it was dumb luck that the crusaders took the city God, whom upon hearing the prayers of the Crusaders, sent to them the help they need: am I a joke to you?

[@a.h.tvideomapping4293]

God 100 years later: actually nah

[@AndrewJ9673]

Haven’t found Dad yet Mapping both of these comments are gems

[@freepz4980]

lol nice one made me laugh

[@Dddome96]

why arent there anymore videos

[@bobshanty455]

Your three sentence summary is just plain wrong.......

[@leronbenari226]

How

[@pennsylvaniaball9137]

+ProfessionalWingman Yes it is.

[@ovenchickenus]

+The Mailman How is it wrong?

[@HeyImLucious]

Colonization implies that they had no reason to be there other than "we want that land" or something similar to that vain. To drastically oversimplify things: it was an act of restoration of the Holy Land (from the point of view of the Europeans) and a reconquest of territory that was taken from them by the Seljuk turks (from the point of view of the Byzantines). To merely imply that this was colonization is just misleading. (my answer is misleading as well since I'm not mentioning years of Islamic oppression of Christians, the revival of Christian moral after Charlemagne halted the moors, the growing threat of Islamic invaders in Italy/Sicily, major European powers emerging with the increase of centralization of power, the rise of a new institution known as "Christendom", and many many more key historical points that led up to this)

[@bobshanty455]

+Ovenchicken crusades didnt only happen in the holy land. The moors had conquered most of spain, which was reconquered in a crusade. Anatolia was conquered by the Sejulk Turks, again this was taken back. The crusades werent just a war to reclaim jerusalem, they were wars fought to save european culture, as by the time the firat crusade began 2/3 of Christendom had been conquered by muslim armies

[@jf8465]

Why take the wood from the ships? Because all the trees were cut down.... “dubious”

[@micahqgecko]

Yah with the first crusade there are two options, either they had the luckiest chain of events in history, or deus voluit.

[@RaitoYagami88]

If it was God's will, they would have kept the Outremer instead of getting curbstomped at the Horns of Hattin.

[@a.h.tvideomapping4293]

RaitoYagami88 and getting the true cross captured

[@V1GG3boiii]

Would love some more videos about the medieval period, especially the crusades

[@abualkek-londonijr.5903]

Nothing to do AT ALL with colonization, it was about securing the way for pilgrims in the Middle East, acting as a diversion against Islamic occupation/invasion in Italy and Spain and rescuing persecuted christians in the region (even if the last one didn't work so well).

[@Drigger95]

you sad fool. There was nothing preventing pilgrimage. It was the Byzantine empire that tried force converting all the jews in the holy land until the Muslims came onto the scene and treated all the religions like an adult and let them each have their spot in palestine. Read a book

[@manolisdermitzakis7619]

I really like the way you describe the historical events in your videos, so i have a request. Could you make some videos about late antiquity roman empire, byzantine/ eastern roman empire? Or maybe about the mithridatic wars and a personal favorite Marcus Aurelius. Thanks! (i'm sorry for my english it's not my native language)

[@hiukas.]

I can already hear people saying "it was a miracle!" 😑...

[@alexandertan7958]

Is this guy still producing videos?

[@michaelpisciarino5348]

0:10 - failed colonization of the holy land - Unsuccessful Eight Crusades - _The First Crusade_ Crusaders capture Jerusalem

[@lorddashdonalddappington2653]

Captured Jerusalem and held it for a while before being ultimately rebuffed. Can't say a colonization was successful if you didn't keep it.

[@mpinnegar]

I really liked your videos. Please make more :)

[@HighAdmiral]

I enjoy your videos about the Roman Empire, even if you are just a Pompeian cur, but calling the Crusades "attempted colonisation" when they were wars of reconquest is simply ridiculous.

[@schnoz2372]

They aren’t reconquests. The invaders weren’t reclaiming anything they were using their religion as a flimsy causus belli to yes colonies the region. They would have been settling in the region and conquering the native people. That’s a colonization lol

[@HighAdmiral]

​@@schnoz2372 Stating the same thing again while adding nothing to it won't make it true. Jerusalem was held by Christians before Muslims invaded. The goal of the crusades was to make this land be once again held by Christianity, which fits the definition of reconquest.

[@aryanrudra24]

Out of curiosity, are you a professor/student of military history or just an amateur history student?