The Last Crusade - Battle of Varna 1444 - Crusaders attempt to drive out the Ottomans from Europe

🚩 Click betterhelp.com... for 10% off your first month of therapy with our sponsor BetterHelp.
🚩 Join over 4 million people who’ve met with a therapist on BetterHelp and started living a healthier, happier life.
🚩 Support HistoryMarche on Patreon and get ad-free early access to our videos for as little as $1: / historymarche
📢 Narrated by David McCallion
🎼 Music:
Epidemic Sound
Filmstro
📚 Sources:
Norman Davies - God’s Playground, Vol. 1: The Origins to 1795
Pat Engel - The Realm of St Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895-1526
Colin Imber - The Crusade of Varna, 1443-1445 (Crusade Texts in Translation)
John Jefferson - The Holy Wars of King Wladislas and Sultan Murad: The Ottoman-Christian Conflict from 1438-1444
Samuel Astley Dunham - The History of Poland
Camile Muresanu - John Hunyadi: Defender of Christendom
#history #medieval #crusades

[@HistoryMarche]

🚩 Click betterhelp.com/historymarche for 10% off your first month of therapy with our sponsor BetterHelp. 🚩 Join over 4 million people who’ve met with a therapist on BetterHelp and started living a healthier, happier life. 🚩 Got a big one for you today, the Battle of Varna 1444 AD. The episode is similar in scale and detail to the Battle of Ankara 1402, so if you enjoyed that one you'll like Varna. I covered all three phases of the battle that are usually not mentioned, which make this battle so massive. The Crusade of Varna, which culminated in the Ottoman victory over a largely Hungarian force on November 10, 1444, effectively ended the European efforts to save Constantinople and enabled the Turkish conquest and expansion into the Balkans and towards Central Europe. kzbin.infogaming/emoji/7ff574f2/emoji_u1f6a9.png

[@TheMessiahOfThe99Percent]

❤

[@TerrorbelliDecuspacis-w5f]

Another Ottoman video🤣 I'm sure there will still be many videos on your beloved Ottomans topic! Your Eurocentric approach never ceases to impress 😂 Only European affairs matter! Bravo👏

[@zen2557]

Numbers are wrong

[@pAttern__iii505]

Not 44 minutes , better upload 400 hours long video ! People doesn't have something else except of watching your videos !

[@nisrmasry2134]

There's a theory that the military victory of the ottoman Turks at Varna in 1444 AD had opened the way to conquer the Great City of Constantinople itself, Nine years later in 1453 AD !

[@giubgiubbi3409]

Pov: You're an Europa Universalis IV player.

[@winzyl9546]

No

[@KamukuraV3]

Yes

[@uptheblues1875]

The game starts just after this battle

[@theflashplays3972]

Here, 2500hours

[@CatholicDragoon]

Ooh! Another Ottoman video. Definitely enjoy when you guys fill in the gaps in the Ottoman Empire's history, wish there was an Ottoman History playlist in chronological order.

[@lothric_k]

Do you criticize or like it ? 😂

[@AXharoth]

@@lothric_k can you read?

[@peregrinusdeflandria3143]

Everyone knows the borders of 11/11/1444!

[@jackshannen809]

Europa Universalis IV is definitely a great game, it only took me 100+hours too learn lol😂

[@DawidStarzykiewicz]

@@jackshannen809 You need 1000 hours to learn basics :D

[@uptheblues1875]

​@@DawidStarzykiewiczhonestly the best way to learn early on is to use cheats so you can experience other aspects of the game which would take hours normally. Helps you understand whats useful later on and what's not

[@deadlytree6650]

​@@jackshannen809 Only 1344 more hours to hit 1444 to beat the tutorial.

[@benimtelefoncaliyor1dk]

Murad II , who twice abdicated , was the most engaging character among all the sultans , a great warrior but also a great lover of the arts and philosophy .

[@nenenindonu]

Murad's seem to be the most competent group of Ottomans :D Murad I, Murad II, Murad IV all top elite

[@dansto5240]

Yeah I can't believe I'm 42 and am just learning about these great men /leaders

[@alaa6532]

@@nenenindonu we will all pretend Murad III never existed😂

[@nenenindonu]

@@alaa6532 It's said that he had 130 children, does this make him a competent Murad ? Idk

[@sonnyb7612]

And I'm sure a great lover of children like his prophet.

[@CrownHetman]

Fun Fact: In Poland, we talk of a legend of Zawisza Czarny (Zawisza the Black), who was considered the greatest knight of Poland at the time. He was meant to meet his end at the battle of Varna. Also, King Wladislas is known as Wladislaw of Varna. That nickname was given to him upon his death at the battle.

[@themosticonicscenesinmovie8737]

Zawisza died long before battle of Varna was fought.

[@CrownHetman]

@@themosticonicscenesinmovie8737 That is one of the theories. That is why i called it a legend. There are debates whether the guy even existed. I just stated what i was always told.

[@thegraybeards2568]

Thanks for the fun facts. I would have never known about these if the kind commenters had not mentioned them.

[@kowu3014]

@@thegraybeards2568 the internet entertains and teaches

[@nisrmasry2134]

​@@CrownHetman There's a theory that the military victory of the ottoman Turks at Varna in 1444 AD had opened the way to conquer the Great City of Constantinople itself, Nine years later in 1453 AD !

[@cenktuneygok8986]

21:00 A mistake here. It was not Vlad III Dracula Tepeş (impaler) who aided the crusade but his father Vlad II Dracul. The narrator spelled the correct name, but the name and the symbolic portrait shown are wrong.

[@paulbriot1404]

Yes!

[@annuryilham5561]

​@@paulbriot1404Yes, does it's his first mistake?

[@FuhqEwe]

@@annuryilham5561What? 😂

[@daarom3472]

​@@FuhqEwetwice at least

[@FuhqEwe]

@@daarom3472 What?

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

Over forty minutes of historymarche?! YES PLEASE! Love your work 🎉🎉🎉🎉

[@benimtelefoncaliyor1dk]

Turkish historians declare that Murad II . was “ a just and valiant prince , of a great soul , patient of labors , learned , merciful , religious , charitable , a good sovereign , and a great general . ” Christian writers also accord to him great abilities , and greater freedom from vice and passion than most of the rulers of that age . He was eighteen years of age when he ascended the throne in 1421 .

[@yesilcam3380]

Thomas napıyo hacı 🤣

[@benjaminbritsch1749]

so abducting children and force them to fight for you makes you a great soul? Interesting.

[@arda213]

Adam resmen papanın bile oha çüş diyeceği kadar yanlı bir şekilde yapmış videoyu. Osmanlılar toplam 60.000 haçlılar 23.000'di. Haçlılar yine de yendiler ama ah işte Wladislaw toy çocuktu gaza geldi o yüzden kaybettik'e bağlamış resmen.

[@RowbuttBatmin]

Oh yes I'll listen to Turkish historians and their institutionalized misinformation. Turkish Historians can't even admit they committed the Armenian genocide in the 1900s.

[@younessezaidi8942]

Hungarien propaganda 😂😂

[@frankzohoolihan2196]

Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory

[@arda213]

No dont talk about it because it wasnt the case. This video is pure BS. 1- There is always a scapegoat in history for any defeat. Usually the dead one since he cant talk for himself so he was conveniently chosen. We dont know whether Wladislaw was indeed carried away or it was a desperate last attempt to charge at Ottoman centre to turn the tide. What we know is the battle didnt ensue in ''3 phrases'' in the last of which sultan retreated into some fucking camp or he completely awaited his reserve army until the 40.000 strong army was defeated thorougly. 2- It is almost impossible to determine the numbers in this battle but even European accounts dont give these numbers. Those that give 60.000 for Ottomans give 30-40.000 for crusaders while those that give 20.000 for crusaders give 40.000 for Ottomans and these are the European accounts. 3- We have almost no idea regarding how the battle ensued. Appearently Wladislaw charged at the centre of Ottoman army at some point and couldnt make it. He was blamed for the defeat but we cannot know whether he was indeed responsible or was chosen as a scapegoat and the outcome was already clear at that point and he charged as a desperate attempt. It for certainly however didnt happen in 3 phrases. That is the biggest bullshit of this video. No account mentions that and it completely conflicts Ottoman doctrines or logic. Why the hell would Murad keep his elite 20.000 strong army by his side until the 40.000 strong Ottoman army is thoroughly defeated first. They didnt have that many kapikulu soldiers at the date and they would use them as reserve troops in all battles.

[@matikhorasani3842]

This was an extremely biased point of view of the defeated Europeans. That's not exactly how the actual battle went and nor was the numbers given on each side accurate.

[@frankzohoolihan2196]

@@matikhorasani3842 how so

[@kadudeduder5103]

@@frankzohoolihan2196 there were only European sources used, you could say it's a western channel so it's normal but it just feels distasteful. It's like when Turks make the empire grander than it was citing only Turkish/muslim sources. Doesn't feel objective in any way. Both sides will of course try to make their own accomplishments grander and their opponents' smaller. You should compare sources, make estimates and try to find the truth not whatever was done here. I usually like history marche too but this was just a big disappointment.

[@kadudeduder5103]

@@frankzohoolihan2196 this genuinely feels like a fairy tale retelling of the story.

[@Davscabecinhadeguidao]

I'm sorry about the death of the Polish king, if he hadn't gotten excited at the time of the attack, perhaps the world would be very different today. His death resulted in an Interregnum that united Poland and Lithuania into one nation. But the Turks fought bravely and received their reward. Hugs from Brazil, and thanks for the video!

[@Welfu1]

I am pretty sure even if polish king didn’t do so the navy from Constantinople would have taken more than 2 days to embark on Verna till then it would have been hard to supply the army with food for army and horses plus an ottoman assault with a discovery of a flank on right between beach and wagons would have been charged

[@unepersonnequelconque9759]

@@Welfu1 If he didn't charge, he wouldn't have been killed, wouldn't have forced his knights to retreat, along many other men. Not only there would have been way more soldiers the next day ready to fight for the Ottomans, but morale would've been way higher, with the king alive.

[@itamarmoreira5161]

o que vc ta fazendo aqui cara ???

[@Davscabecinhadeguidao]

@@itamarmoreira5161 amo história:D

[@badiciekrem7655]

This video is biased. The size of crusaders were much more than Ottomans cuz the ottoman anatolian contingents were blocked from entering balkans

[@HistoryMarche]

🚩 Got a big one for you today, the Battle of Varna 1444 AD. The episode is similar in scale and detail to the Battle of Ankara 1402, so if you enjoyed that one you'll like Varna. I covered all three phases of the battle that are usually not mentioned, which make this battle so massive. The Crusade of Varna, which culminated in the Ottoman victory over a largely Hungarian force on November 10, 1444, effectively ended the European efforts to save Constantinople and enabled the Turkish conquest and expansion into the Balkans and towards Central Europe.

[@Iiiiiiiiiiiic123]

محتوى جميل ❤

[@peterbalogh8138]

@@Iiiiiiiiiiiic123 Murder, plunder, rape and destruction.

[@Mahmoud-dp7ox]

​@@Iiiiiiiiiiiic123الحمدلله مش لوحدى اللى بتابع المحتوى ده

[@Iiiiiiiiiiiic123]

@@Mahmoud-dp7ox حبيبي ❤

[@Iiiiiiiiiiiic123]

@@Mahmoud-dp7ox وأنا مثلك

[@nenenindonu]

The Battle of Varna was the Manzikert of the Balkans; spontaneous event started by the enemy, cemented Turkish presence in Thrace as Manzikert did for Anatolia, and obviously a legendary victory

[@SolidAvenger1290]

It was a mix of Manzikert's geopolitical consequences and the battlefield results of Keresztes in 1596. The Crusaders almost had a small victory in the course of the battle during this Crusade (depending on whether John Hunyadi was able to persuade the king not to chase after the Ottomans and reconsider their poor tactical position so that the Crusaders could preserve their remaining manpower and possibly leave the battlefield), but the position that the Polish King put them in ended any hopes of salvaging the campaign akin to Romanov IV's legacy for Byzantium. Władysław III's aggressiveness and his portion of the Crusader force also made the same wrong decision that Maximilian III of Austria made when his troops got too overconfident in attacking the Sultan's camp when the Ottoman leader was able to bring victory from the jaws of defeat. Christian monarchs have overestimated their Persian counterparts' military capacities and influence for centuries. Their biggest Achilles heel was maintaining cohesive military control over their armies when overconfidence & glory override any common sense of military awareness.

[@Tyrach.]

@@SolidAvenger1290 This depiction of the battle is too Eurocentric, sounds like you're licking your wounds

[@nenenindonu]

​@@Tyrach.Especially the part with "The Crusaders almost won the battle" no, no they didn't 😅

[@SolidAvenger1290]

@@nenenindonu In truth, they had a few small victories against the Ottomans on the battlefield; however, to your tactical point, the Sultan still retained some fresh and best troops to guard the camp to where the opposing enemy of the Ottomans made a very tactical error. Which was very smart and akin to what other great sultans have done in history. The battle was already moot for the Christians in a compromised position as time progressed. Like at Manzikert, Keresaztes, and now Varna, all three Christian leaders (Byzantine Emperor Romanos IV', Maximilian, and Władysław III) greatly underestimated the capacities/tactics of their opposing army's troops, including the respect & more significant influence of their respected leader/Sultan to inspire the men to fight longer in battle. In all three scenarios from the onset, the Christians were more or less outnumbered yet saw glimpses of victory, but human hubris would turn its ugly head again as we would see both Romanovs IV & Władysław III for glory charge their troops into an trap that would see the whole decimation of their armies. Maximillian was lucky that his defeat at Keresaztes didn't reach the high levels of his contemporaries. However, the lack of control over others was the biggest Achilles heel for many Christian monarchs for centuries in many crusades. Note-HistoryMarche, based on flawed secondary sources, forgot a few critical details about Alparslan in their video about Manzikert months ago. They received comments stating that the battle was viewed from a Eurocentric POV, which I highly agree wasn't great overall. To conclude, I misspoke about the Crusaders "almost" winning. I was trying to present potential alternative observations had things gone differently. However, the Ottomans still had the upper hand in the overall position, given how compromised the Crusaders were at Varna. Had Władysław II not charged the Ottoman camp, and the Crusaders reconsidered their position after temporarily beating back the Sultan's army, the best option would have been to pull out and evade the Ottomans to fight another day.

[@SolidAvenger1290]

@@nenenindonu, if it makes you feel better, I misspoke and have already corrected that. Note to Tyrach-That is a respectable viewpoint overall & I will respect that. To be honest, I didn't particularly appreciate either that HM made eurocentric errors or missed Persian facts on their Manzikert video about Alp Arslan seven months ago. Faulty secondary sources depicted the Persian side, which many called out in the comment section over time. The point was trying to make was that all three battles highlighted the tale of human hubris for Christendom's leaders when things were truly on the line, and the brilliance of Persian leaders is showcased to everyone on the battlefield. Like many Christian leaders, their Achilles heel was the coordination & control of their troops and their overconfidence in battle for personal glory.

[@nenenindonu]

One shouldn't expect less from Mehmed the Conqueror's father. Murad II was a bane of Crusaders and immortalized his name up there with kinsmen Baybars and Nuraddin Zengi

[@Asterix958]

The first big Turkish defeats in the Balkans began during the reign of Murat II. Murat II was written as a fair and merciful ruler, but I do not think Murat 2 was very successful militarily. Moreover, the Crusaders lost the Battle of Varna only because of the imprudent attack of the young Hungarian King. I think that Mehmet the Conqueror's active personality emerged as a reaction to his father, Murat II. Murat II wasn't as powerful ruler as we thought.

[@arda213]

Adam resmen papanın bile oha çüş diyeceği kadar yanlı bir şekilde yapmış videoyu. Osmanlılar toplam 60.000 haçlılar 23.000'di. Haçlılar yine de yendiler ama ah işte Wladislaw toy çocuktu gaza geldi o yüzden kaybettik'e bağlamış resmen.

[@arda213]

@@Asterix958 Dont take this dumbass video seriously. The resources on the battle of Varna are very fucking scarce. This video exceeds even the Christian telling of how the battle took place in propaganda. There is no account that claims it was 60.000 vs 23.000 or the battle was in three stages and christians actually defeated the Ottoman army. Even the account regarding ''Christians were doing fine until Wladislaw charged and died'' is a subject of debate, we dont know if it was a feigned retreat by the Ottomans, a very typical tactic of Asian armies.

[@tiboruhrin4080]

​@@Asterix958That king came from the Polish royal house and was never Hungarian! Obelix became wiser because he kept quiet! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@younessezaidi8942]

Hungarien propaganda 😂😂

[@syedharis1906]

I love how murad didnt leave the battlefield or went home even after getting severe attacks twice...... He was there, waiting for his chance to shine...

[@gaplan7]

Let me provide information about the impaled head mentioned in the video, which deeply saddened the narrator. The Turks had signed a ten-year peace treaty with the Crusaders. The agreement was in favor of the Crusaders. During the treaty, the Turks swore on the Quran, and the Crusaders on the Bible, that they would remain faithful to the agreement. Subsequently, Sultan Murad, trusting this agreement, abdicated the throne and was succeeded by his 12-year-old son, Mehmet II. The Pope saw this as an opportunity and convinced Wladislas and other Christians that the promise made to the Turks had no value. When it was heard that the Crusader army was preparing for war, the young Sultan Mehmet II wrote a letter to his father, saying, "If you are the Sultan, you should lead your army and state at such a time. If I am the Sultan, I order you to come and lead the army." Sultan Murad, in response to this call, took command of the army. Before the battle, the Turkish army planted two spears in the ground. The first spear had the agreement document attached to it. The second spear was empty. The head of Wladislas, who broke his promise, would be placed on this empty spear. And so, the empty spear served its purpose. The Crusaders, who had previously broken their promises, were punished once again for this reason. Turks want even their enemies to be honorable!

[@BuddyWudzyn]

Thank you for this wonderful bit of extra information!

[@metokur85]

The catholic promises is meaningless. They are people without honor.

[@Dornan77802]

Eh… Idk, the Turks and Muslims in general broke promises as well. Neither side’s better than the other on that count. Though, screw Jizya and all of that other tyrannical stuff.

[@Easternromanfan]

He would be avenged at belgrade by Hunyadi

[@imranreiaz-wk9lv]

@@metokur85crusaders were animals wherever they were. Spanish English German they were all animals. Was an excuse to become bandits

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

COMMENT FOR THE ALGORITHM!

[@michanycz7166]

For the algorithm!

[@williamyoung9401]

Just don't promote BetterHelp. Total scam with no privacy protections. They sell your private data and correspondence to 3rd parties.

[@kamilmucha8566]

I watched you from the very beginning of the channel and every video I saw I thought you can't get better, but every time you exceeded my expectations

[@mrblock1318]

The king trying to Solo another King and getting killed is kinda funny. Like what was his escape plan?

[@arda213]

This is not how the events ensued, thats why it looks so stupid. Watch king and generals video on this battle. This channel made up a pure fantasy video.

[@IvanKatkovsky]

​@@arda213 It doesnt matter, we couldnt know all truth, what's was ocurring in that day

[@Losowy]

​@@arda213funny how you're implying that Kings and Generals aren't making things up while you can clearly see that just by looking at their pro-ukrainian bias lol

[@johanmikkael6903]

​@@LosowyI wager their bias is in more of modern history than medieval and ancient times.

[@yousseftrab3615]

@@arda213 kings and generals videos are biased i dont trust them

[@khaledys-en8hm]

The Crusaders always exaggerated the stories of their battles

[@xxxashaazxxx3456]

fr

[@radored7750]

They were so close, if Wladyslaw listened to Hunyadi, the battle could have been won. Great video, I am looking for more.

[@michanycz7166]

Well, if only, right?

[@AnatolianHittite]

Yes. In any case, all European defeat depends on either cloudy weather or various misfortunes. It certainly cannot be a result of the Turks' successful implementation of their tactics and strength!!!

[@michanycz7166]

@@AnatolianHittite nobody here said that, on the contrary, to be fair the Genoese did help the Turks in that particular situation by ferrying their troops. It is reasonable to assume that things would have turned out very differently, had they not.

[@CpTnot]

In a fight it will always comes down to who won the war

[@Dornan77802]

It also didn’t help that various groups like the Genoese betrayed Europe for the Ottomans. Ironic considering they themselves would later lose everything they had in the East to the Ottomans later on.

[@AliSyed711]

In total, I count 120 Ottoman squares against 54 Crusader squares. What is this???

[@ejayaziz470]

Christians logic : ottoman 1millions VS 20k Christian 😂

[@CptSlow89]

As a christian, hats off to Ottomans discipline and war skills.

[@AegeanGreywolf]

After a bloody defeat, many European armies would disperse, I agree. Ottomans took heavy blows and they are able to regroup and fight back just after series of massacres. This shows how effectively they used the chain of command and discipline.

[@01ment]

The only value of the Turks were their numbers. As soon as those numbers lost significance, Ottomans became "Sick man of Europe". If Bulgarians weren't that stupid, Turks would be out of Constantinople too.

[@TrentBattyDrums]

Wow. That was mesmerizing. Great video mate, you had me on the edge of my seat the entire time. What it must have been like to see both armies fully formed up waiting to maul each other... We can only shudder and imagine. May all the fallen Rest in Peace.

[@robbabcock_]

It constantly amazes me how often history turns on a knife edge!

[@TOKMAKCI_BASPAPAZ]

No ethno-linguistic group dealt with Crusades more than the Turkic peoples did. Turks dealt with Crusades for 600 years both in the form of actual Crusades or Holy Leagues. There are around more than 12 Crusades & Holy Leagues directed at Turks.

[@Nom_AnorVSJedi]

Strange the Arabs abrogated their responsibility to protect Islam.

[@evanspetrou6260]

that is not an accurate statement. Not all of them were crusades, but conquering back the Muslim invaders. With the same manner, no other European Balkan countries has been invaded, conquered, sieged(even Malta) and raided as much as the Turks did. Rapid expansion always causes this!

[@Nom_AnorVSJedi]

I wonder why the Arabs abrogated their responsibility to protect Islam? Why did they lose their fighting spirit?

[@noir1923]

@@Nom_AnorVSJedi Arabs conquered so much from iberia to iran, they peaked and lost their fighting spirit after saladdin, then they gave the sword of islam to turks until the first world war

[@nathanruben-tv5lf]

Turks are still at front gate of Islam. They are coming again...

[@Kraat]

While the channel itself has always been a biased narrator- which is perfectly understandable-, this one is both unclear and disjointed in its narrative, so much so that it watches like historical fanfiction instead of an actual informative media work. There is even an actual skip in sequences during battle. The more likely actuality of events is like this, as shown in the video the battle had neither side as the favorite during frantic nature of the fighting, then the polish hungarian king charged and lost. "Crusaders won but somehow did not press the attack and the young king attacked alone because he was zealous" does not make sense, nor does the actual failure of Hunyadi and Vladislaw linking up if the battle had ceased to be shown as Crusader victory at first. In this videos current narrative, John Hunyadi is shown to be someone who left the young king he worked with and for years to battle against Ottomans alone. If it is not the intended message, i would suggest a review of your work. Then he promptly folds and runs away from the battlefield even though some of the army is still present at the wagon fort they built. Which is then slaughtered by Ottoman army. We could say Ottomans advantage was overwhelming so the crusaders being able to make a stand meant a victory. And that's what the video tried to show. Except, Ottomans are doing the defensive battle here and if they are not routed then it is a strategic victory. The video in its totality, makes little sense. What you do with this fact is up to you.

[@DragovianMythiX]

I am glad other people have also noticed this. Anyone who knows about this battle, surely should be able to see that there are many question marks in there. Not only bias, but also because this channel wants to be different from other channels, so they feel that they must come with new things, at which point they are running the risk of making errors.

[@sibaltas]

I have similar feelings, lots of details and gaps. After watching this only thing that I can think of is the list of references

[@ahmadnaser8172]

Yeah it sounds like the Chinese version of the good general advising against attack to the incompetent leader … but was ignored that is why they lost .. they did the same bias for the battle of nicopolos blaming the French and also the same for the 6th crusade defeat where they also blamed another French guy .. just to keep the crusader strong and cowardly middle easterners image..

[@AltaicGigachad]

The Turks too , the great warriors of the steppes , were almost haughty in the assumption that they inherited the jihad fighting spirit of the tradition and carried it half - way into Europe .

[@LauftFafa]

technically the last crusade was the one launched by portugal on morocco and ended by total defeat of portugal that saw them losing their super power status after that and being relegated to a second rate power

[@davidp7178]

Technically, Morrocco is not in Europe, as the tittle of the video was NOT the last crusade but the last crusade to drive the devils from Europe, not Africa.

[@LauftFafa]

@@davidp7178 i agree , this one was last crusade in europe yes .

[@GAarcher]

@@davidp7178 *The roman empire included africa, if that is the foundation of european civilization, it's logical to forget this bullshit about africa and europe and understand that the map was more like "Catholics" and "Muslims", Europe was more like "Everything Catholic" than any concept of geography, since scandinavia or britain are not in the same region as, say, italy**

[@dentkort]

​@@GAarcherThis is true. There was no sense of unity based on the shared continent back then, that's more of a modern development. It was all about religion, and Europeans would routinely massacre each other over religion (northern crusades, thirty years war). Europeans of different ethnicities have never unified on the basis of race or geography, only culture and religion.

[@noir1923]

@@davidp7178 oh so we are the devils now huh ?

[@andrewkasma9457]

I'm a simple man; I see a HistoryMarche video, I play it immediately. Thanks for all you do!

[@yusufonde5590]

Numbers are kinda wrong. Only Hungarians had around 20k troops. Total army of crusaders was between 60k to 80k

[@MazharMunawar]

Exactly

[@Asterix958]

Hungarians brought 6,000 soldiers in Battle of Varna. Total number of Crusader army was 20,000 against unknown number of Ottoman army. Ottoman army was around 40,000, 2 times of Crusader army.

[@fehervari98]

Rubicon contributed to the video, I don't doubt their numbers.

[@Tyrach.]

in Nicoplis e.g. The whole of Europe is supposedly gathering just 20,000 Crusaders against Bayezid who (has little bit less, according to European sources) but in Ankara both the Ottoman and Timur armies are around a hundred thousand strong, they only talk up their defeats, the same with Manzikert, first Kosovo or Mezokeresztes

[@Asterix958]

​@@Tyrach. In Battle of Varna, Crusader formed large alliance but not all Europa joined. They only sent fraction of their forces to Ottomans. They had capacity to send at least 60k soldiers but they didn't. Maybe reason was that they discouraged to send large army because they were already defeated in the 1 years ago, Hunyadi's Winter Campaign (1443) with 40,000 soldiers. Low number of Crusader army also indirectly confirmed in Europan sources. For instance, Vlad Dracula visited the Crusader army camp and he said to Hunyadi "Sultan go for hunting with more people" implying that Hunyadi's army very small. Hunyadi got angry to this remark, expelling Vlad Dracule from the camp. Numbers in the Battle of Ankara was also exaggerated. Scratch Muslim and European sources claims that Bayezid had 70k soldiers and Timur had 160k soldiers. Muslim sources were known for exaggerating army number around 2-3 times. Real numbers were probably around 30k vs 90k.

[@brothersINtawheed]

I am no Ottomans supporter but it doesn't make sense most of Europe were able to gather only half of Ottoman's army basis on the fact that Ottomans were struggling at Eastern front too.. I've seen a couple of your videos and you seem biased and can't digest the loss of crusaders.. Your children will be making videos that only U.S with few hundred men gained victory over Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and also helped þ¡s-ra-ill against supposedly so called "war on t3rr0r" 😅

[@Truthbetold367]

Afghanistan beat the US

[@Ug0tmi1k]

The foolish charge the Polish king did at the end of the battle was a literal turning point in history! Imagine what could have been if he didn't charge

[@Jackaljkljkl]

If you think about it, charges of Polish kings bookended (i.e. began and ended) the period of Ottoman hegemony.

[@talusn9405]

You see, your King from Turkey didn't have the courage to fight the Polish King, someone else attacked the Polish King out of ambush, you have no Honor or Courage

[@adnanmalik6703]

I truly appreciate your efforts and most importantly your intentions to add authenticated information only when describing any event. Kudos to you.

[@Sirgrayfox]

"Hello, my name is Wladyslaw III and welcome to Jackass..." [theme song; xDDD

[@UwaysGhazi]

idk man, the way that you made the ottoman forces look stupidly large and at one point casually showed 3 red squares destroy 12 green ones in the space of one second makes this unenjoyable to watch. If you look at the Yarmuk video, the Romans visually look to be the same strength as the Arabs. What is this then? Idk.

[@Mehmet.Nur.Burkay]

You are so right my friend, and on top of that, he says he is outnumbered and shows equal boxes, it's totally ugly 😁(eril)

[@Tyrach.]

@@Mehmet.Nur.Burkayyes they simply cannot cope with their defeats

[@yusufklc2962]

They have inferiority complexes towards the Turks. They are extremely brazen and out of touch with reality. There is no history in the West, there are made up fairy tales.

[@syed1431]

The 3 red squares were heavy european knights, covered from foot to head in metal armour, charging into lightly armoured and armed footmen. Knights were like medieval tanks, 100 knights could rout 1000 man easily.

[@yusufklc2962]

@@syed1431 There are no fixed men in front of you. They did not stand a chance against the light, active and disciplined Turkish army. Tin men were defeated in all major wars.

[@emreozer6876]

Such quality content that I even don’t skip the sponsor section 😂

[@samlloyd3286]

Didn’t see yall get 1 million subs, congratulations!

[@AXharoth]

oh wow

[@sammysooby5685]

Thanks!

[@HistoryMarche]

Thanks so much for your kind support! Much appreciated.

[@IronWarrior86]

Constantinople was really just a speed bump. How the crusaders managed to screw up even at Varna.

[@nathanruben-tv5lf]

The numbers and ottoman superiority is totaly wrong and misinformation. Crusaders were invading army. Ottomans were defending. It is just absurd to invade with lesser force againts Ottomans. These crusaders armies were always superior...

[@oldmonk_]

The channel has shown 5 source materials for his claim. What's yours? Now please don't tell that you just believe it or heard from your elders.

[@omerfaruk6082]

Sultan had the beheaded head of Ladislaus placed to the top of a spear and erected it to the next to the spear on which Edirne-Segedin Treaty was hanging, which the king violated despite his holy oath on Bible. It is a severe lesson for future generations.

[@Markjr778]

Thank you for more on the Crusades my favorite topic

[@kadudeduder5103]

This was one of the absolute worst depiction of this battle I've seen so far. So the crusader army having repulsed the attacks and still is relatively well organized just lets the king and his guard attack the not yet entirely defeated Ottoman army in their forts which supposedly outnumbered the Europeans almost 2 : 1. Even if the king died at that point the crusaders would've been enough to push the Ottomans to the brink in Europe. They could've at least tried to compare with Ottoman sources. Damn this feels like an alcoholic dad trying talk about his great past. I usually enjoy your videos but this was just absurd. This just makes me doubt credibility of any HM's other videos.

[@daryl94]

kaboom police be upon him

[@History_Teller1250]

​@@daryl94You went off topic...

[@Amin-y6v2r]

This guy made the crusader victory at first seem more imminent and way greater than it actually did. Doesn't make any sense considering their total immediate defeat and the one sidedness of his sources

[@Zoltan1251]

wtf is everyone on about? This is amalgamation of all historic resources. There is literally no propaganda value in twisted ancient history. Ffs, classic arabs, alway butthurt about something.

[@xxxashaazxxx3456]

@@Zoltan1251 arabs? lmao , you shouldnt even be commenting rn

[@heitoroliveira2025]

Really liked the new use of 3d models for some of the scenes, allways love the improving quality of the animations and production

[@szabolcsbuki3749]

When Hunyadi died of the plague, he had just won a mighty battle against the Ottoman Empire. This was the victory in Nándorfehérvár (Belgrade). It would be nice to present that event here on the channel! :)

[@bigsarge2085]

Incredible documentary, thank you!

[@N-Noori]

Great Video ❤ Great channel 👏 Please next Hannibal part 20 😢

[@AltaicGigachad]

For many the essential enemy was the Ottoman Turks, whose aggression and brutality were widely disseminated. Their activities and plans were subjected to numerous prophetic and apocalyptic readings. Many contemporaries described their Christian opponents as Turks or ‘worse than Turks’, a practice that demonstrated both the potency of the Turkish image and the internal divisions which plagued the Christian world. For Erasmus and other moral reformers the Turk resided within each Christian, and Christian sinfulness was fully as fatal to the common defence of Europe as political rivalries.

[@Byzantine-Revolt]

@@GermanicDutchEnjoyer He is nomadic he travels far and wide to spread historical knowledge.

[@mirajthepro4269]

Liar

[@mirajthepro4269]

Ottoman empire one of the greatest empire in history and anyone disagreeing is the biggest GAY/LGBTQ supporter in the history of mankind

[@Odysseus_of_ithica]

As if the Islamic world was united😂😂 The Russian Empire rap*ed the Ottomans in Many later wars Not a single Muslim nation came to their rescue.

[@Odysseus_of_ithica]

The Islamic world was fractured much More than Christendom. If I were to list how many wars were fought between Muslim kingdoms and sects the list will never end.

[@sancar560]

sources very reliable !!

[@Vadim_Ibragimov]

Please consider covering the battle of Molodi 1572 someday. It is not very famous even here in Russia, although it's impact was huge. In 1571 crimean tatars burned down Moscow. But after this battle they were no longer a threat to Russia and Poland-Lithuania. The events of battle itself were epic and caused the huge tatar-ottoman force to be completely destroyed

[@Tyrach.]

This depiction of the battle is too Eurocentric, sounds like you're licking your wounds. in Nicoplis e.g. The whole of Europe is supposedly gathering just 20,000 Crusaders against Bayezid who (has little bit less, according to European sources) but in Ankara both the Ottoman and Çagatay armies are around a hundred thousand strong, they only talk up their defeats, the same with Manzikert, first Kosovo or Mezokeresztes

[@molybdaen11]

You are free to do your own video. Please post the link once you are ready.

[@alvirarahman574]

@@molybdaen11Nah just because someone makes a video don't expect us to just watch bullshit and NEVER call him out for it. This is the most pathetic attempt at "saving grace" for Westerners I have ever seen. Just simply pathetic

[@molybdaen11]

@@alvirarahman574 Dude, this happened in the 15th century. None of these empires are around anymore.

[@alvirarahman574]

@@molybdaen11 so? This is such a dumb point. We are supposed to roll over and not care when historical accounts are MISREPRESENTED? And excuse me? Why are you then in a History Channel? The whole point of this place is about history. You are by definition, in the wrong place

[@molybdaen11]

@@alvirarahman574 What difference does it makes if they fought with 1k or 100k units? The economy which prodoced this armys is not around anymore. I also do not get why so are so fired up? Are you a mummy and have created this armys?

[@alexismoungara4]

This channel is wonderful. I’m so surprised I hadn’t run into it before

[@hertyu100]

I am highly doubtful of the battle depicted in this video. The final result of the battle and events portrayed here do not match at all.

[@alvirarahman574]

That's because these losers tries to "save face" here. Bad Ottomans attacked "poor Christians" and "poor Christians" just lost.

[@arda213]

He is full of fucking shit. This video is literally a wound licking by a bigot. I am not even muslim but as a Turk I am disgusted by how a channel cant even humbly depict events of history as they were. We dont know much about how the battle has ensued since it was centuries ago. The way he seperated the battle into 3 phrases like 3 seperate battles and came to the ''Europeans actually won but oh that youngly stupid brave Wladislaw, he was just too carried away!'' conclusion just makes me die inside from cringe.

[@antop2757]

Amazing video

[@John3.36]

Pride of the king led to his death. They probably should have rested and waited instead of pressing their luck after a long day of battles.

[@mostafa_hafiz]

Thanks for the great video

[@AliSyed711]

How you greatly exaggerate Ottoman numbers and casualties with squares here ie. how you showed 3 knight squares charge and destroy 12 Ottomans. I would appreciate it if you applied this same standard to Ottoman/Muslim victories. This selectivity isn’t very objective is it? Ie. look at your Yarmuk video, Tarrain II, Heliopolis. In all of these, the Muslims were outnumbered by over 2:1 (according to you) yet you depict the Muslims as having been only slightly outnumbered. Yet conversely, if you look at this video or Mohacs or Alcacer Quibir etc (so many examples), the Muslims look overwhelmingly numerically superior such that the victory seems inevitable. I’m sure that you’re better than this. Thanks.

[@mihajlo7893]

i love history marche one of the best storytellers on the internet..so many details so simply explained at times i feel like i am in the middle of those great battles in that our past..a big salute to the author and his army of followers..  🛡️🌹⚔️

[@theclash1984]

Amazing channel

[@kogerugaming]

John Hunyadi (Hunyadi János) was the father of Matthias Corvinus aka Hunyadi Mátyás one of, if not the most famous hungarian king, founder of the black army of hungary, who would later besiege Vienna, taking the city and most of upper Austria, dying there 5 years later.

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

The moment that Europe realized that the ottomans were there to stay. Suggestion: please cover the conquest lf Granada by the catholic monarchs!🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉

[@michanycz7166]

Nikopolis had proved that already. They just couldn't see it at the time.

[@RKJ-c7k]

Wladyslaw perfectly fits the description of my ranked teamates

[@msbudmsbud7593]

I think you didnt consult ottoman/turkish sources on this dear HistoryMarche ! Be try to be objective, will you ?!

[@mirzaamuhammadmaaazbinshaahid]

They never do! Same problem with Kings and General and other war history English language channels!

[@MazharMunawar]

@@mirzaamuhammadmaaazbinshaahid exactly bro it’s so annoying. It would be okay if people saw them as biased channels but the average person thinks that *this* is supposed to be the objective/unbiased account

[@valdarbordan4512]

Maybe because he is viewing it through the lenses of the Western coalition.

[@ariyoiansky291]

Thank you for your hard work, History Marche. That was highly entertaining and informative!

[@DragovianMythiX]

I have read and watched several sources about this battle, but none was as different as yours. What are your sources? I understand that you want to be different from other channels that already have covered this battle, but you cannot sacrifice historical accuracy to get a one up on other channels. Looking at the comments, I am not the only one who has noticed this.

[@rashan112]

Something I never understood very well: hearing of all the battles from the Ottoman Empire, I always get a feeling that they could easily afford to suffer hundreds of thousands of killed soldiers each year, and basically shrug it off, while half of Europe combined could field 1/50th of their numbers. How was this possible?

[@DCabbagefarm]

The Ottomans are fighting at home, where they can call up large numbers of levies and garrison forces to bulk out their numbers, while the crusader forces to a large extent consist of volunteers who are motivated enough to journey across half the continent to participate (and have the means to be able to afford doing so), in an age where crusading as a movement was already on the wane anyway. Also note that the numbers given for these battles are stunningly, staggeringly unreliable. Taking the crusade of Nicopolis for example, a contemporary source says some 16000 crusaders and 200K Ottomans, while a contemporary Ottoman source says 60K Ottomans and 130K crusaders. Some of those numbers are clearly absurd and you'll notice the blatant bias that the side that is writing is claiming their side heroically faced down a gazillion foes.

[@xdd87]

Because Ottoman numbers are inflated to show Ottoman victories as unimportant as possible. That's a propaganda channel.

[@sarranidmemluk7680]

Osmanlı zaferini önemsizlestirmeye çalışıyorlar müslüman Türklerin Avrupa'da sayısızkez toplu haçlı birliklerini yenilgiye ugratmasi avrupa yandaşlı tarihçilerin zoruna gidiyor bu nedenlede Osmanlı'nın asker sayısını şişiriyorlar zaten mantikli bir insan bunların abarti olduğunu bilir çünkü haçlı seferlerine bütün Avrupa katılıyor özellikle niğbolu savaşındaki haçlı ordusu 14.yuzyilin gördüğü en büyük haçlı ordusuydu İngiltere dahil bütün avrupa asker göndermişti ve kaynaklar bu ordunun 100bin ile 150bin arası olduğunu söylüyor buna karşın yıldırım beyazidin ordusu bu ordunun yarisi kadar küçüktü çünkü yıldırım haçlılarin Balkanlari yağmalamadan hızlıca orduyu kurup Haçlıların karşısına çıkmayı hedefliyordu bu yuzden ordusunun tamamını toplayamadi ve savaşın sonunda Türkler zamanın en büyük Avrupa haçlı ordusunu mağlup etti ve binlerce haçlı esir alındı yıldırım beyazid çok travmatik çabuk öfkelenen pskoloji bozuk cesur bir kisilige sahipti bunun en büyük sebebi savaşlarda hızlı agresif ve atilgan olmasiyla gencliginde babasinin kosova meydan muharebeside ölümüne şahit olup kardeşini de öldürmek zorunda kalmasiydi bu olaylar onu piskolojik olarak etkilemiş olucakki niğbolu savasi bittikten sonra meydandaki ölü türk askerlerini görünceye sinir krizi geçirip bütün esirlerin kafalarinin kesilmesini emretmistir ve bu idam süresi sabahtan akşama kadar sürmüştü çünkü bir sürü esir vardi ve bu esir sayisida Haçlıların en az 120 bin kişilik orduya sahip olduğunu destekler niyetinde bu dediklerim bizzat savaşa katilan Osmanlı tarihçisi ibnul cezeri eserinde bunu anlatır ve yabancı kaynak olarak niğbolu savasina Haçlıların yanına asker olarak katilan Alman asilli 16 yaşındaki Johan schiltberger kendi biyografisinda bu esir idamini kanitlayan yazılar yazmıştır ve esirlerin idam edilisi akşam ezanina kadar sürmüştür sira kendisine gelince Osmanlı şehzadesi yaşı küçük diye johan schiltbergeri öldürtmemistir bu idamlar uzayınca paşalar ve din adamları yıldırım beyazide gelip durmasını gerektigini durmazsa Allah'ın lanetini üstüne alacağını söylemiş ve bunun uzerine esir katline son verilmistir kalan esirler Geliboluya gonderilmistir şimdi düşün o kadar cok esir varki idam edilmeleri saatler sürüyor ve bu kanitlar hiç bir şekilde Haçlı ordusunun sayısını 100binden az olduğunu söyleyemez hatta Macar krali sigismund gemisiyle ülkesine kacrken Çanakkale boğazından geçtiği sürede niğboludaki esirler karaya çıkartilio boğazdan geçen kralin gözlerinin önüne bozduğu barış antlaşmasına ibret olsun diye sergilenmiştir bunuda bizzat sergilenen Alman esiri 16 yaşındaki çocuk olan johannes schiltberger kendi biyografisinde yazıyor hatta konudan bağımsız bir bilgi vereyim bu çocuk daha sonradan ankara savaşında timurun ordusu tarafından esir alınıyor

[@tugrahsnkvk4616]

Thanks for video. I really enjoyed this one

[@arda213]

You enjoyed diarrhea of a bigot christian that still feels butthurt over a 600 year old battle?

[@enginerikli5895]

An outnumbered force breaks the peace agreement and charge deep into enemy territories, dumb commanders from both sides send piecemeal over piecemeal, armies retreat and dig in just after they route the enemy, then they come out again to attack in the same day... Carnival of implausibilities. Bilemiyorum Altan.

[@yalcnbey5834]

9.25 "besting a force of 70 thousand" Yet another fantastically absurd claim by yet another god knows which Balkan "historian" And of course the Turkish army was at least 2, if not 3 times that of the poor innocent christians :'((( I mean ofc the poor innocent christians were an entire civilization arrayed against a single nation who didn't get any help from anyone, but still it was an unfair struggle because them orcs were billions >:'(

[@iseeyou5061]

21:02 That was putting it midly. Vlad basicly say that Murad bring more follower for hunting games than Wladyslaw army 😂

[@middleearthltd]

“Executing in cold blood” during a battle Seriously ? How can this be taken seriously ?

[@PashtuninUniform]

I like your videos very much bcz generally they are non biased but this is the first time it looked very biased, great video though🥰🥰🥰

[@AAA-p3i5v]

That’s the wrong Vlad. Vlad II ‘Dracul’ is a distinct figure from Vlad III ‘Dracula’.

[@byzulescku]

It s his father

[@arda213]

That was the only innocent mistake of the video.

[@AAA-p3i5v]

@@byzulescku Yes. Vlad III was Mircea’s brother.

[@KevinMorata]

Just, wow. Thank you so much to make us more cultivated 🙏

[@noir1923]

Proud of being a muslim turk 💪🦾

[@thelurker1330]

Alhamdulillah

[@AliMuslim-n9b]

Who told you that only Turk fight in the army of Ottomans

[@Paracelsus2037]

@@AliMuslim-n9b Who fought, the Kenyans ?

[@Humayerzidan]

good job man , keep it up. we want more frequent videos.

[@bohohohohoyt]

Etre fort comme un Turc" This expression dates from the 15th century. It refers to the period of the Ottoman Empire when the Turks won many conquests by their strength and cruelty, they were merciless. The Turk therefore represented at the time the supreme enemy, the unbeatable.

[@danieltodorov3863]

Yes!!! Finally a video about this!

[@Frank-ru5im]

Absolutely loved it! I urge you to make more videos on these types of large battles. the battle of ankara now stands to be my all time favorite. lets top that!

[@michaelsinger4638]

Murad’s terms were very generous. Breaking the truce was a big mistake

[@johnsword8954]

Absolutely amazing naration.

[@eqbal321a]

much better than the other channels

[@rudihermawan5740]

waw.. what a war. bizzare yet tragic in same time. thank you for the upload!

[@msbudmsbud7593]

Sorry but the whole battle sounds like a fairy tale to me !! Where did you took it from HistoryMarche?

[@younessezaidi8942]

Hungarien propaganda 😂😂

[@Tyrach.]

@@younessezaidi8942 sounds more Polish bro

[@talusn9405]

You see, your King from Turkey didn't have the courage to fight the Polish King, someone else attacked the Polish King out of ambush, you have no Honor or Courage

[@IhaveSindh]

​@@talusn9405xD polish king truce brakes after all the truce breakes and shit sultans patience wins works smart and honorable

[@talusn9405]

@@IhaveSindh I wonder what you would write if the Polish king caught him 1 on 1 and killed him 😄You see, in the Battle of Grunwald, when the Teutonic Knights attacked the Polish king, he himself fought them and won.🤗🤗🤗

[@h.mubasharhussain9605]

I've seen almost all the documentaries they made on Ottoman victories and I wonder how Ottomans made an empire of unmatched might and strength standing on three continents just by luck after got beaten all the times by mighty Europeans of dark age, and I wonder how the Ottomans were feared by almost all the countries of that time... That's insane... And that's strange... same the case of Sultan Saladin Ayubi. They portrayed him as ineffective against Richard the dark ager... Saladin made them husk, he alone shattered crusaders of whole/hole Europe, even then they view him as ineffective against those so called crusaders... Anyone has knowledge and sense of history and social sciences can detect the biasness in documentaries of HistoryMarche channel... This biasness should be condemned...

[@kaangundogmus4624]

Your videos in general always have been more european sided since this channel open. But this is one of the most biased version of your videos I've ever seen. I have a master degree in history and as I can see, you deliberately took the most biased sources for your video. It's just sad and pathetic.

[@mirjanaivankovic2656]

Amazing video and an even better effort at it,you truly are making masterpieces everytime you upload,love and peace from Belgrade.

[@mustafakaraca387]

Your numbers are so biased. Two to one? You didn't even use a Turkish source

[@arda213]

Dude even European sources didnt claim 60k vs 23k. The ones that claim Ottomans were 60k also say Europeans were 30-40k and the ones that claim Europeans were 20k say Ottomans were 40k in total. He says crusaders first defeated a 40k army with their 23k, then sultan unleashed his 20k private army (in 1444 there werent that many kapikulu to begin with) which crusaders also defeated but only then the silly Wladislaw got himself into his youth energy a bit and caused a domino effect.

[@mustafakaraca387]

@@arda213 Ne yazdığımı anladın mı?

[@arda213]

@@mustafakaraca387 Senin dediğini destekleyen nitelikte bir şey yazdım. Sana katıldım yani, sen yanlış anladın.

[@mustafakaraca387]

​@@arda213 Bu oe nin tüm videoları böyle. Kendisiyle çelişiyor s2k. Güya Niğbolu savaşında iki tarafta 20 bin kişiydi. Yine kendisinin yaptığı Ankara savaşı videosuna Osmanlının 60 bin askeri vardı. Yıldırım 6 senede 40 bin askeri ağaçtan mı topladı? Kings and Generals kanalı daha objektif bu oe ye nazaran

[@arda213]

@@Tyrach. Her yere bunu yapıştırıp atıyorum: 1- There is always a scapegoat in history for any defeat. Usually the dead one since he cant talk for himself so he was conveniently chosen. 2- It is almost impossible to determine the numbers in this battle but even European accounts dont give these numbers. Those that give 60.000 for Ottomans give 30-40.000 for crusaders while those that give 20.000 for crusaders give 40.000 for Ottomans and these are the European accounts. 3- We have almost no idea regarding how the battle ensued. Appearently Wladislaw charged at the centre of Ottoman army at some point and couldnt make it. He was blamed for the defeat but we cannot know whether he was indeed responsible or was chosen as a scapegoat and the outcome was already clear at that point and he charged as a desperate attempt. It for certainly however didnt happen in 3 phrases. That is the biggest bullshit of this video. No account mentions that and it completely conflicts Ottoman doctrines or logic. Why the hell would Murad keep his elite 20.000 strong army by his side until the 40.000 strong Ottoman army is thoroughly defeated first. They didnt have that many kapikulu soldiers at the date and they would use them as reserve troops in all battles.

[@numenoreaneternity6682]

When it comes to Southeastern Europe, the majority of internet "historians" are traditionally fixated on the East Roman Empire, and ignore the fact that the said Empire hasn't boasted a dominant role in SE Europe from the 1200s and onward, the state that did, in fact, boasts the dominant role was the Medieval Serb state, whether in the form of the Serbian Empire, Lazar's Serbia and the Serbian Despotate, the said state was the preeminent enemy of the Ottoman Empire in SE Europe and the preeminent bulwark against the Ottoman Empire with the largest flatland fortress in Europe, waging war against the Ottomans for more or less 100-140 years, depending on whether one identifies Zeta as the final iteration of the Medieval Serb state. Considering the massive territory liberated in the first year of the Varna Crusade, it is more than apparent that the Serb and Hungarian, not Polish leadership were instrumental in the matter, and both, due to generation-spanning experience in waging war against the Ottomans, understood that after these triumphs and the events in Anatolia (invasion of the Ottoman Empire by either the Karamanids or the Aydinids), the Ottomans were in a dire position, and could not retake lost territories, and would agree to all terms of negotiation, and they did at Szeged, but Polish, East Roman and the Vatican geopolitical aspiration triumphed over reason, and they pushed for the furthering of the Varna Crusade (thus turning triumph into defeat), instead of consolidating their positions against the Ottomans, as Hunyadi and Brankovic had advised. Furthermore, Branković had a much larger interest in the peace treaty and solicited Hunyadi's support. He demanded that Serbia be returned to him, and he bribed Hunyadi by promising him the land he held in Hungary. On July 3, 1444, the lordship of Világosvár was transferred, in perpetuity, to Hunyadi. Around the same time, as additional security, the estates of Mukačevo, Baia Mare, Satu Mare, Debrecen, and Böszörmény were also transferred, and Hunyadi became the largest landowner in the Kingdom. There is another reason for this, Brankovic understood that a Hungary dominated by Hunyadi and his progeny would be a vital asset and ally to the Serb state, and to Hungary itself. He was proven right, the rule of Corvinus speaks volumes on the matter.

[@badiciekrem7655]

Your content is very biased. I laughed hard when u mentioned the numbers of the hosts. In reality cruader army were around 60k and the Ottoman 35k cuz the anatolian contingents were staying in anatolia. Crusader army included far more europeans than hungarians, poles, wallachian...

[@pandaren_brewmaster]

Ottomans also left a sizeable force to make sure Byzantines wouldn't join the Crusaders. These numbers in the video are ridiculous.

[@hereandnow3156]

Where are you getting the number 35k from? The numbers quoted in this video reflect numbers given by the majority of the sources.

[@johannchristian2551]

Lol. Every turk is biased

[@richestmanintatooine7131]

Ottoman Empire fighting vs Crusaders to WW1! It's an insane long-lasting Empire. Enduring all this pressure from East and West constantly and lasting 600 years.

[@ericcampbell9470]

The Ottoman "Empire" was less than a seventh of the US (minus Alaska) it it's greatest and most of the land was unpopulated scrub.. Not really a big deal.

[@richestmanintatooine7131]

@@ericcampbell9470 HAHAHAAHAH AMERICAN PEASANTS STRIKE AGAIN

[@richestmanintatooine7131]

@@ericcampbell9470 American arrogance and ignorance are without a match.

[@Orkymandias]

@@ericcampbell9470 Ottoman Empire ruled over the toughest geographic position on this planet for 600 years. Please don't confuse colonizing with conquering. We are not the same :)

[@forlornfool221]

This story & battle always gets me going..❤

[@rnz1155]

Using more historical portraits would be better

[@milosmladenovic2661]

They looked way better then AI ones and give more actual information on historical figure.

[@coyote4237]

Wonderful content on this channel. Thank you.

[@wojciechgoj]

What source you have details for this clip? I aware of different scenario. Would be interesting to read such story side in other sources...

[@elmascapo6588]

​@@AstraZeneca-h1zthe sources are literally in the description

[@chadwolf5596]

Epic history storytelling brother !

[@TsarPeter1680]

The forces of the Sultan and the Crusaders were almost equal. You have created a ridiculous situation with sources made by Europeans during the Dark Ages. In every war the Europeans have shown themselves brave in the pages of history. They even wrote the battles they lost as they almost won but lost in the end due to mistakes. Your video seems like a fairy tale rather than real history

[@sarranidmemluk7680]

I absolutely agree with what you say. The Christian world cannot digest the defeats they suffered against Muslims and they are telling a history that is far from objectivity.