History Hit Medieval Expert Said WHAT!? Unbelievable...

[@metatronyt]

Link to the original video kzbin.info/www/bejne/rZ7RZmioZd-Xo6c Link to my Joan of Arch video kzbin.info/www/bejne/noDYmmWoirh1mNE

[@lonneansekishoku8288]

Since you like Oblivion. I want to know if heard about the leaks the Oblivion remake or remaster that will supposedly come out in 2025?

[@brittakriep2938]

I am german, born 1965, my interest in history started 1971 during a Kindergarten trip to a fairytale castle ( Lichtenstein). I am only factory worker, but live in a german region full of historical relicts from celtic to modern days. Perhaps ten years ago i was on mountain Hohenstaufen, naming HRE Emperors Friedrich l and Friedrich ll ( who was also King of Naples). For a swabian romantic a nearly holy location. I spoke with two old Gentlemen. They said: Old , knights movies ' are not historical correct, but nearly documentations, compared to modern , knights movies '.

[@jager6863]

The two fastest way to become a complete idiot is either to be appointed as a Court Judge or become a College Professor. Most of these people need to find their true calling with the trash companies.

[@akasharaider5644]

Hi, you should watch: How To Build A Medieval Castle From Scratch | Secrets Of The Castle | Timeline - it's whole series of this with historian, archeologist etc for real building castle in France using medieval technics en living like medieval folks.

[@NickNappi-j5o]

@@metatronyt Metatron I really enjoy your content and i really wish it didn’t come to this. I am sorry but Sadly my reason for unsubscribing is not because of you at all. Some person was being homophobic and ignorant in the comments and I politely said that someone putting pronouns on a instagram account is not the problem. The problem is when people spread false information regarding history. And after i said that with polite and genuine intentions i get people sending laugh emojis and people just being mean. I don’t appreciate when a community i care about turns to an unsafe environment where certain individuals just can’t have a filter and not be unkind. I already had to completely make a new account because i was having people sabotaging my account and being unkind and i honestly don’t trust anyone who is going to be viscous or ignorant online now. I have to protect myself and only fallow channels that have less trolls and unnecessary unkind people interacting in the community. Again this has absolutely nothing to do with Metatron I have much respect for him pushing the truth about history calling people out when it is necessary. I hope you do well Metatron.

[@Hathur]

Being burned at the stake absolutely left bones behind.. MANY bones behind. Modern cremation, which is vastly hotter than a pyre, still leaves small pieces of bone behind, which is often pulverized before being given to the family.

[@ctrlaltdebug]

If the fire is hot enough, bones will fall apart. I think a few chips of bone aren't good enough to make a relic because no one can tell where it came from.

[@OutlawPrince45]

Yep, people call it their relatives “ashes” but in reality it’s more like charred bone sand.

[@jhoughjr1]

Idk about that. A wood fire can melt iron.

[@janrothkanarski]

Sure, but a splinter of burnt bone is probably Far less convincing or valuable than say, a complete Skull, or a hand, any complete and recognizable body part. Not everything can be a 'splinter from the True Cross' and be worth it.

[@Hathur]

@@jhoughjr1 No, it can't. A wood fire in ideal circumstances can only reach a maximum of 1,100 degrees celsius. Iron only begins to melt at 1,205 celsius at the lowest and properly at 1,300 C. It was NOT possible to begin melting iron until blacksmiths discovered the use of charcoal, which can produce far more energy than wood and reach higher temps. Bone will only incinerate to ash at 700c, which is well beyond the temperature of a pyre out in the open. For wood to reach that temperature, it needs a controlled hearth / oven etc, which is why the bones of people burned at the stake were typically mostly intact. They would have likely been crushed / pulverized though to avoid the aforementioned fear of relics being created by fanatics.

[@chrisdiboll2256]

Just asked chatgpt for an image of the battle of agincourt. There’s a fighter jet in it. Told it that’s wrong and it apologised and offered to produce a more accurate version. There’s a chinook in this one 🤦‍♂️

[@Cyborg999999]

Based chatgpt 🤣🤣🤣

[@metatronyt]

Holy moly I wish she saw that one!

[@tanikokishimoto1604]

Wow, I'm gonna have to have fun with chatgpt!!!

[@aleisterlavey9716]

Everybody knows they only had spitfires back then.

[@shurik121]

I asked chatGPT to make a historically accurate painting of the battle of Hastings. I got a medieval castle in the background and several flying things that were somewhere between a simple plane and a 4-winged dragon-bird.

[@hadiajina]

"She was born in France." "Nobody's perfect." 18:07

[@stevelinley1073]

I blame the parents.

[@michelguevara151]

I resemble that comment

[@shawn6860]

For me it would be "She was born in Quebec."

[@mindmedic9435]

Why the hate for France? For shame!

[@edoardoprevelato6577]

​@@mindmedic9435 it's a meme borne out of the french infamous arrogance and haughtiness despite their several fuckups throughout history

[@jmhatyoutube6283]

Funny that she asserts medieval folks couldn’t learn, right after she’s told us that they had to invent a special tool to remove an arrow from the king’s face.

[@ctrlaltdebug]

Medieval historian: Guns weren't in the middle ages. Me: Lady, did you even play Age of Empires 2?

[@michaeldoolan7595]

@@ctrlaltdebug the French actually turned up with a cannon at Agincourt. They only fired it s couple of times and did " allegedly " kill some English troops. Hand cannons were used in late medieval Europe during the war of the roses.

[@chonconnor6144]

​@@michaeldoolan7595certainly by War of the Roses firearms had become common and the 1600s led to revolutionary developments.

[@fuselpeter5393]

How do you turn this on? :D

[@ImotekhtheStormlord-tx2it]

ikr. asians had gun powder in the early medieval times already

[@PeregrinTintenfish]

I thought AoE was a required credit

[@nicholaswiley1692]

I could totally imagine Trump charging with a lance in full plate. “I have the greatest lance! People tell me all the time that it’s the best in the world!” 😂

[@declanjones8888]

Lmao, he'd probably charge in the wrong direction.

[@C_R_O_M________]

@@declanjones8888 sorry m8, that would be definitely be Biden!

[@declanjones8888]

@@C_R_O_M________ If you think any politician (especially billionaires) has your interest in mind, your the biggest fool here. EDIT: But its okay, you can stay in your little echo chamber where Trump is the greatest God known to mankind.

[@C_R_O_M________]

@@declanjones8888 who said that you troll? Talking about echo chambers! BTW, Trump ISN'T a politician so wrong there too!

[@uponeric36]

@@declanjones8888 Trump would charge in the right direction, but spend too much time picking up the hats for the real soldiers while patting their backs "Did you know you're the best knights - greatest military in the world I tell you, we have the biggest lances the biggest, most beautiful horses -" "E-ehm I'm honored sir but aren't you going to meet the Mexican's in battle and save the border?"

[@kiyruchan9535]

The leaders of old knew the cost of war i find it admirable that they fought with their men and went to war with them

[@metatronyt]

It’s probably why soldiers were more faithful to the generals than the senators.

[@kiyruchan9535]

@metatronyt you would get to know the character of the person leading you to war. Modern political leaders should learn from the concept of leading by example the ones calling for any new wars should be the first down the recruiting office lol.

[@jhoughjr1]

@@metatronytwell u know ur general has your back. You know the senators have their own

[@aaronaxel4760]

Modern day politicians may be less likely to go to war if they had to go with us soldiers.

[@Schnittertm1]

I mean, that is what you get when you don't have access to modern means of communication and modern, long range weaponry. If you want your army led, you have to do it yourself and on the battlefield.

[@QuestionsStuff]

Her smugness was overbearing

[@RogerTheil]

"I'm SOOOO much more knowledgable about medieval history than AI!" Imagine thinking this is a flex.

[@pattywolford]

Can’t stand her.

[@magivkmeister6166]

​@@RogerTheilThat argument won't hold for much longer either, considering the rate AI is improving.

[@jeremyhoward9163]

Her way of speaking is incredibly obnoxious, for sure.

[@jonsnowight9510]

That's what happens when women get told they're experts in some field

[@aeronaut8088]

She thinks she's being cute, when she's just annoying

[@JDoe-gf5oz]

Probably uses BCE/CE.

[@noxplay4906]

@@JDoe-gf5oz Real chads use BC and AD.

[@soulknife20]

​@noxplay4906 It doesn't really matter. Its the same thing. No one cares

[@Aechelian]

​@@soulknife20 If no one cares then why do so many people care?

[@spaman7716]

​@@soulknife20if it doesn't matter why change it in the first place

[@stewrmo]

I have always had an alergic reaction to this particular lady. One love from Scotland. 💙 🦁 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

[@AnOldFashionedWoman]

Me too. I find her insufferable.

[@declanjones8888]

As others have said, she has this smugness to her attitude.

[@pattywolford]

Same…can’t stand her!

[@fmsyntheses]

Imagine having a leader who sees themselves as an extension of the will and power of their people in the world to such an extent that they're willing to put their lives on the line.

[@def3ndr887]

During ww2 Hitler feared the Kaiserreich because the Kaiser’s son wanted to fight alongside the men in the Wehrmacht

[@TechnoMinarchist]

For most of the medieval period the kings didn't see themselves as extensions of their people or will. That only really came in the later parts when they began to dismantle feudalism. They put their lives on the line because they were warriors, which is where their ancestors got their legitimacy from.

[@kajkviggs]

@@TechnoMinarchist exactly the opposite.

[@ganjacomo2005]

​@kajkviggs no, there is a massive distinction between being the extension of the people and their will and being the first of the people and being the will itself. Nobles went to battle because they were warriors, it was their life. The whole concept of people and nation rethoric came with absolutism, and the end of feudalism and the end of the warrior ruling class came soon after. Before that they couldn't care less about the paesantry, obviously they generally wanted them to be good and well, but nobles and paesants lived in parallel worlds and the interests of the noble family was always above that of the people.

[@jarlnils435]

​@@ganjacomo2005 knights couldn't care more about peasants during the middle ages. They were dependent on them.

[@BlazingWolfNova]

In WWII, I get the feeling Churchill would've risked going into battle if he was still young. That guy did crazy stuff in his youth.

[@billrolston5800]

He wanted to be on one the ships during the operation and intended to walk ashore once it it was secure. He was talked out of it.

[@def3ndr887]

@@billrolston5800 heard the king wanted to go too and that’s the reason Churchill decided not to go

[@billrolston5800]

@ yeah, I think you’re right.

[@thehowlingmisogynist9871]

@@billrolston5800 - The King banned him from going ashore in Normandy on Day 1. Mainly because Eisenhower had banned the King.

[@robo5013]

@@def3ndr887 Yes, Churchill told Eisenhower his intentions and Ike told him no. Churchill said he was going to do it anyway so Ike called the king and told him about their conversation. The king then called Churchill to a meeting and told him he was going to join him on the ship. That made Churchill change his mind.

[@tell-me-a-story-]

Of course kings fought along with their men! That’s why so many child kings existed.

[@Madonnalitta1]

They didn't. They are few and far between. Kings would sit a few miles out from the battle.

[@MrDeadhead1952]

Sorry but thats nonsense, child Kings where common because of the prevalence of fatal diseases and politics.

[@ImotekhtheStormlord-tx2it]

@@Madonnalitta1 thats a lie lmao. viking kings, english kings, slavic kings...... bro are you restarted? you know about cesar sitting in the camp during a battle and you suddenly have a "kings didnt fight, majority of them didnt" which is wrong. minority didnt fight. majority fought.

[@magivkmeister6166]

​@@ImotekhtheStormlord-tx2itNot to mention the last Byzantine Emperor who died in a heroic last stand during the siege of Constantinople.

[@youareacoward8459]

@@Madonnalitta1 a king that did not fight would not get ANY respect, it's not like today.

[@BenjaminTMilnes]

'This is a personal affront to me.' Yeah somehow I suspect a lot of things are.

[@nickvanachthoven7252]

she radiates Karen.

[@yj9032]

You too give the same energy

[@Eagle-eye-pie]

@@yj9032M’lady.

[@JoeyP946]

lmao

[@tanikokishimoto1604]

I have several friends named Karen who radiate Karen. The real Karen, not that tired and lame insult too many small minded people like to toss around.

[@I_am_Diogenes]

7:00 I tend to judge modern times by ancient times .

[@metatronyt]

Ahah

[@jhoughjr1]

When in Rome

[@CAP198462]

That sounds like a series. Ancient Roman legatus judges the modern world.

[@shrouded8797]

​@@CAP198462 I'd watch that series.

[@Derkuhlshrank]

​@@CAP198462 can't be worse than most conservative culture war freaks

[@msquared6695]

Richard The Lion Heart was another one to get stuck in.Theres an account from an Arab that witnessed The Lion Heart make landing from his ship.He basically said he immediately got stuck into the battle and the Arab guy was quite impressed.

[@stevelinley1073]

Yep. Jaffa 1192

[@michaeldoolan7595]

@msquared6695 carrying a two-handed Dane axe?

[@def3ndr887]

He still bankrupted England thanks to that ransom

[@Mick-1415]

Funny how the same place and people are still bankrupting England 🤭

[@defectiveindustries]

Saladin sent him a horse in battle one time as Richard's got killed, apparently

[@kevg1617]

She isn't sarcastic, she's snarky.

[@curtismantle]

I watched her first video on History Hit a few years ago and never watched another. I checked out her Twitter at the time and the contempt she had for her audience was deeply unpleasant.

[@JB-vq6oe]

Is she the kind that thinks because she is a PhD that everyone else is a simple peasant? (Also substitute in “professor” or “historian” for “PhD”.)

[@Rabbithole8]

I stopped watching History Hit preciously for the same reason.

[@randyhill1492]

Like when Dan Snow was begging people to vote for the cackling hyena.

[@jhoughjr1]

So often goes propped up women

[@pskarnaq73]

I tend to skip her episodes on the podcasts.

[@stormlord1984]

She is really hard to watch with the way she speaks and her grimaces. I am constantly getting a haughty/superiority holier-than-thou attitude. Tone it down, miss!

[@ChuckHickl]

Not disagreeing the the woman comes off annoying but "haughty/superiority holier-than-thou attitude" is precisely how I would describe this channel but please, do feel free to rationalize it however you want as I do know YTers like this have their fans.

[@badfoody]

eh so she kinda acts like a female Metatron? lol i love the guy but he has that vibe, sure hers is more "try hard" but it's there

[@BD90..]

The medieval people would think some of us are stupid for denying what a woman is. Something so simple to understand but some modern people refuse to acknowledge a fact.

[@bizzapandare1209]

How a channel, who is so focused on being in the middle or even out of politics and just judge history from the perspective of facts - not feelings, has to many hurt little boys.

[@eliaustin6952]

what a woman is is something socially created. in the middle ages, social concepts of women and man were rigid. it wasn’t like that in some indigenous societies and it isn’t like that now…

[@jasonlauritsen5587]

Something so simple even diseases, bacteria, and other basic lifeforms can understand. Despite not having brains and cognition in the traditional sense. This slight bump in history is going to be viewed worse than the Salem Witch hunting days. Atleast back then, people were uneducated morons.

[@Same-o9e]

​@@bizzapandare1209 Cute how you think calling others ‘little boys’ makes you seem mature. Maybe it's just the little girl energy you're projecting. But hey, deflecting the actual point with childish insults seems to be your thing

[@ashildrtheswift3028]

Why'd you have to bring this shit here?

[@christopherwebb3517]

5:13 - Theodore Roosevelt resigned from his position as acting Secretary of the Navy to go personally fight in the Spanish American War. He became Vice President just three years later, and President just a few months after that.

[@DonPedroTheDude]

Kings led armies because if they had a general, that commander would be in charge and could depose them.

[@dms79]

Kings also led armies because it made them look like brave, strong leaders. Maybe some really were, maybe some really weren't, but it was all about perception and who got the credit for a victory.

[@declanjones8888]

Not necessarily, but in some Kingdoms/Empires that was an issue. Eastern Rome comes to mind..... actually scratch that just the Roman Empire in general.

[@DonPedroTheDude]

@declanjones8888 Sorry, I didn't say all kings and I think we're mainly focusing on the medieval west. I think you underestimate how precarious dynasties were before the renaissance. Allowing a vassal to make your conquests would be seriously destabilising.

[@michaeldoolan7595]

​@@dms79Well if they lost they frequently died or were deposed. Being a Monarch meant you had to have a good average of wins to losses. A complete laser sat on a throne didn't sit on it long.

[@Mark-op7hd]

@@dms79 at least the men had a good reason to follow there king as he was risking the same as them

[@unarealtaragionevole]

There are a few videos floating around YT on the topic of the Black Death, were they did some DNA studies on known victims and survivors who were not affected at all. And they found that one difference between the victims and the survivors was the D32 gene mutation. After looking at several samples across Europe and Asia they found that a large portion of victims lacked the D32 gene mutation while the populations and (individuals) who survived were the ones with the mutation. If true, I find this interesting.

[@jhoughjr1]

Ive heard it makes ppl have autoimmune issues, which i have.

[@unarealtaragionevole]

@@jhoughjr1 I'm sorry to hear that. I was thinking of one of the videos I saw, I wish I could remember the channel it was on, but it was like a documentary on the Black Death were they focused on this small town in England that was unaffected when all the surrounding towns were totally wiped out. They did studies on the mass grave victims of the surrounding towns and then the survivors of the unaffected town. That's when they discovered the D32 mutation connection, and from there they started looking and seeing this all over the world affected by the plague. There was this tragic story of a wife who had to take care of her dying friends and family. And she wrote daily about the sickness, it's some of the best first hand accounts not from a doctor or outsider looking in, it was her painful story and what she saw and experienced.

[@badlaamaurukehu]

Iirc there was a study that showed a higher resistance to certain retroviruses prevalant in these populations...

[@uponeric36]

I've always heard it generally was a chance thing, that basically everyone will have a semi-random assortment of many many antibodies inside of them along with developed ones from encountering disease, and if you're lucky, you will have some that make you resistant to black plague by chance. I'd be curious about through what mechanism that mutation prevents Black Death, because while we generally understand antibodies as the "key" used to destroy viruses - I don't see how a mutation could do the same inherently, though I get in principle that it's possible for mutations to prevent disease.

[@ChaoticYak1]

Bones don't burn during cremation. They burn the body and then grind the bones into small fragments. (According to a crematorium) However, bones would burn if you could get the temperature high enough. Not sure being burned at the stake would be hot enough.

[@HiraethMasonry]

I’m willing to bet it would get hot enough. Burning lime for conversion to quicklime requires temperatures of about 1,600 degrees F. It’s hard to do but it can be done in an open fire(I’ve done it myself a few times). Bone starts to break down at a slightly lower temperature. The problem would be, would the burning be kept up for three or four hours to complete the process?

[@ChaoticYak1]

@@HiraethMasonry I wonder if they would be willing to keep the fire burning until they couldn't see any bones.

[@MaryLuCrafts]

As I understand it, burning animal bones and interpreting the cracks there of was a form of divination in ancient China. So, in theory, if the bones were to be heated high enough for long enough, would it not be reasonable to see the bones turn into fragments merely due to a lack of structural integrity?

[@ChaoticYak1]

@@MaryLuCrafts Again, according to the crematorium website (Metatron made me curious), the cremation process doesn't burn the bones, but it does break them down to some degree and that process of breaking them down is completed by grinding the bones fragments into a powder. So it does seem as though you're correct.

[@jhoughjr1]

It depends on the size and shape of the fire and how windy it is. Modern crematoriums have time and money and environmental contraints.

[@jaryl13]

The idea of a leader in classical antiquity is still relevant today funnily enough. A large part of the reason people tend to not respect our politicians is because they don’t understand what it’s like for the common folk. To this day, we still will value leaders more who will meet us to our level.

[@UtamagUta]

Even for the modern person (do not mistake with mOdERn aUdienCE) Aragorn is epitomy of a great leader, Anakin Skywalker is an example of a perfect leader. We still attribute bravery and heroism as the best leader personality traits. Even in House of Dragons the first king is depicted as lame although he was a peace maker and great administrator.

[@sambun6394]

@@UtamagUtanot trying to bring God into this but id Jesus did the same example. God comes down into a human form and dies a painful human death. People tend to follow leaders like that. It’s something human beings respect from another human being. Sacrifice❤️ politicians don’t do that these days

[@TheArthoron]

And yet we elected a man who prefers to sit on a toilet made of gold?

[@sambun6394]

@ he’s the one getting called a Nazi and a fascist. If it’s all true, why were all the charges dropped? Don’t just say it’s because he’s president, you know nothing, if that was the case Nixon wouldn’t have been forced out nor Clinton. If I were him, and I were (listen he ain’t innocent but he isn’t Hitler) I’d be happy to keep all the guns trained on me while the citizens he is trying to protect live good lives. The media spent this whole time with him as target #1, that’s how a leader in the old days would do his job. We are simply stating that comparison. If you don’t want to be objective and see all sides than I’m sorry, you will never understand why Kamala Harris lost. I voted for Trump, and I’m a woman. I know Trumps personality better than Kamala. And Kamala was given a hand me down, that’s not democratic. That was pure corruption but you were blinded the whole time by the idea of Trump. Not even realizing that Trump is anti-war, he’s not homophobic, he’s not a Nazi. There are holocaust survivors who have said that themselves. He isnt gonna round up any gay people, yet that was what the media was saying for months before this election. In fact, many gay conservatives exist. Get out of your echo chamber

[@andrewp8284]

@@TheArthoronyeah because most of us had enough of the guy who preferred to use his pants instead of a toilet of any make, model, or trim. (And we didn’t want his cackling lackey either, as you clearly noticed)

[@SefniAsheforr]

This kind of tik tok style, “how do you do my fellow yass queen history girlies!?” delivery and presentation is so painful. This is the kind teaching that is being done in modern academia and it’s having a serious negative effect.

[@SupremeGrand-MasterAzrael]

I would wager you’ve never been inside of an college or university. You complain about “modern academia” but what was so good about non1contemporary Academia? The fact they they knew less and were wrong about many things? Are there some professors that care more about teaching a worldview than the course? I’m sure there are. But you can’t make sweeping ridiculous statements about how bad academia is using technology that would not exist without the MODERN SCIENTIFIC BREAKTHROUGHS that MODERN ACAMEDIA has produced. You sound more like a bigot trying to tiptoe around admitting that you are by pretending you care about “academia” to me.

[@jonnybgoode7742]

​@@SupremeGrand-MasterAzrael you people are the worst...

[@MonsieurDeVeteran]

@@SupremeGrand-MasterAzrael you the B in the video by any chance? Asking for a friend

[@jonathanh761]

You sound like your whole identity is tied up in having gone to a university if i had to guess. Hopefully you grow out of that as most adults do. Having gone to university doesn't make you smart and not going to university doesn't make you dumb. Having gotten a bachelor of science I can confidently say that many of my fellow alum were total morons and many of the courses were in fact awful. @SupremeGrand-MasterAzrael

[@DeHerg]

"Yass Queen girlie"??? Have you not seen the actual clips and made your comment based of the clickbait title? Also she wasn't teaching in class, she did participate in a youtube video.

[@tmmccormick86]

“You can’t throw a gun into a military scene in the Middle Ages” - THERE IS PERIOD ICONOGRAPHY OF HAND CANNONS BEING USED IN CRUSADES.

[@rpgadventurer32]

Not just that, but also other evidence in many forms from that time period.

[@tmmccormick86]

@ oh absolutely. I just used that as a go-to because EVERYONE is pretty familiar with what period the crusades occurred in (relatively early in the period) and everyone has also seen at least some of that iconography. It should be an immediate “duh” moment

[@TheBreechie]

The crossbow is featured in iconography from the crusades, there are no images of not-yet-invented guns, can you provide links to to evidence to back up that claim? The crusades ended just prior to 1300 - Guns were not in Europe until the 1400s … I’m so interested to see where your information comes from

[@TheBreechie]

@@rpgadventurer32there isn’t but feel free to pony up evidence for your claims, I’m keen to see it

[@TheBreechie]

@@tmmccormick86this post is a real “duh” moment but largely to any one who is literate and thinks critically

[@AndyJarman]

Churchill was chaffing at the bit on D day to get onto the beach, and was with the advanced guard as it crossed the Rhine. The British royals have a tradition of serving in active conflicts - even Woke Harry fought in Afghanistan.

[@michaeldoolan7595]

Churchill fought in the Sudan India South Africa and WW1. All front line .

[@G-Mastah-Fash]

Yeah as a chopper pilot firing missiles from 25 kilometers away while watching the enemy through thermals.

[@anthonyoer4778]

​@G-Mastah-Fash no front line in a static war.

[@steveh1792]

@@G-Mastah-Fash Two tours in Afghanistan. Tour 1: Forward air controller (briefly, politics). Tour 2: Apache pilot/gunner. They do CAS, not sniping from "25 kilometers away".

[@simeonwaia]

​@@G-Mastah-Fashonly an idiot would ever fight fair in war, bring every adavantage that you have, the whole point is to win.

[@spyrofrost9158]

She voices her ignorance with such volume and passion. Makes me question every teacher I had in school.

[@stingray4540]

If you really look back and think about it, most of todays misconceptions came from teachers. They teach a subject, but only know what they are told to teach from the text book they have, then think they are an expert on the subject and then proceed to tell people their assumptions, conjecture and educated guesses as if they are fact. Especially pre internet, actually delving deep into a top, especially history, took a lot of time and effort that many teachers didn’t take.

[@noxplay4906]

@@stingray4540 It's not just lack of effort that doesn't explain why this problem is universal and infects every public education system in every Western nation. Go deeper down the rabbit hole. There's a reason why so many parents now want to homeschool their kids and it's not just because the teachers don't want to put in effort. Their hands are quite literally tied. There are a lot of powerful people who represent modern paradigms and ideologies that have many like-minded fellows in education and academia, and they have a vested interest in changing history. Why do you think the fascists are universally condemned but the communists who killed far more aren't? Why do you think they talk about what European colonists did but not what the natives did to each other? Why do you think they don't teach about the involvement of African tribes and kingdoms in the European slave trade? Why do you think the Crusades are universally condemned but they never talk about why they happened in the first place and they never talk about what the Muslims did?

[@Muschelschubs3r]

So you did not have the balls to do that to their faces as a student, huh? Figures.

[@ImotekhtheStormlord-tx2it]

many history teachers act like that bcuz they think they ate all the brain as people say. i had a similar history teacher in my university but the thing was that he was right about 99% things and let people talk. meanwhile this woman looks like she would interrupt you anytime

[@rokasdobrovolskis]

@@noxplay4906 Because they are anti-white jews. Yes, I said that.

[@ErikDanner]

Catholic here, Metatron, yes we do use bones as relics, that we put in our altars during mass. it's normally bones or a piece of cloth. btw way thanks for all the advice on armor, now i have a tailored cuirass. please accept my subscription as my thanks.

[@noxplay4906]

Based trad Cat?

[@dirtyeric]

In Thailand, and I suspect her neighbors, when a Buddhist cremation is finished ,the family members in position of "hierarchy" sift through the ashes looking for artifacts, usually the teeth. When they are found it is considered a sign of favoritism and a blessing by the deceased towards the family member and the opposite if none are found. My ex- was the 11th member to go through her grandmothers ashes (she was raised as the 11th child which was not highly appreciated but she took personal care of them for nearly 30 years) and she found the most relics with the majority of her aunts and uncles finding none. Even in the afterlife the mutual respect is important.

[@publichearing8536]

Thailand is such a weird and wonderful place.

[@Madonnalitta1]

That's gross.

[@declanjones8888]

​@@Madonnalitta1 Oh chill out you Prima Donna.

[@alkatraz706]

​@@Madonnalitta1 nah...all those bones are sterilized by the fire at that point lol

[@michaelkelly4094]

Dismissed her when I saw she wore t-shirt with Trump sporting a Hitler mustache and condemning him as a fascist… I don’t care what your personal politics are, but fascism has a specific definition. Any historian making that connection obviously doesn’t know what fascism is and isn’t worth listening to.

[@rpgadventurer32]

She's a lot of words I can't write here, but she's certainly not an Historian. A sham perhaps.

[@blakebailey22]

He's literally quoted hitler, and has refused to denounce multiple fascist groups, as well as david duke of the kkk, and has played buddy-buddy with dictators around the world. trump is 100% a fascist

[@RedHandedGod]

Trump is literally a fascist and it's absolutely exhausting to watch people try to 'but nuh uh' their way out of that fact. Just say you like fascism. Just say it. It's so much easier and more honest than trying to defend fascists by being all like 'the person isn't LITERALLY Hitler, so they can't be a fascist.'

[@havingfun-u4g]

@@RedHandedGod reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[@Kamamura2]

And yet, Trump is a fascist.

[@Tomichika]

Oh god, please dont let Prague be like Paris is now 🥹

[@PikeBishop1]

The Kalergi Plan is just getting started.

[@noxplay4906]

Paris?! That's my favorite African city!!

[@rokasdobrovolskis]

"Europa the last battle" 12h documentary and "the protocols of the learned elders of zion" explains it all and more. Cheers.

[@gariwald4946]

@@rokasdobrovolskis Quoting the protocols of the learned elders of zion on a channel about objective truth is quite stupid.

[@rokasdobrovolskis]

​@@gariwald4946 Apparently, you know nothing about the past or the present geopolitics then. How naive of you.

[@stevelinley1073]

Burning did not destroy bones: see St Polycarp, whose bones were gathered up by the faithful after his martyrdom and definitely treated as relics. IIRC Joan's remains were burned a second time to reduce them further to dust and then thrown in the Seine

[@wandapease-gi8yo]

King Carolis XII of Sweden died while observing over the bulwarks. Richard III nearly killed Henry VII on the battlefield.

[@coopercummings8370]

That isn't even the only example of a Swedish king dying on the battlefield, Gustavus Adolphus was killed after being separated from his troops while leading a cavalry charge, he wasn't just observing, he was actively fighting and died in the middle of an active battle.

[@michaelmazilu3124]

@@coopercummings8370yeah plus Henry V in agincourt

[@talithakoum3922]

Richard III was a formidable warrior.

[@shawn6860]

@@coopercummings8370 Ya, them Swedes were pretty hardcore about their battles. As Sabaton about some Winged Hassars LOL!

[@def3ndr887]

@@shawn6860 vikingr blood runs through their veins

[@pberci93]

Entire countries fell without resistance because their leader rushed into the enemy ranks swinging a sword. Yes, it is stupid to do that. Why they did it? Because if they didn't lead the strongest force of their country themselves in person, then someone else did and that someone else was usually quick to overthrow them. Maintaining chain of command by all cost is one of the cornerstones behind the efficiency of modern militaries.

[@konstantingr5928]

no its not just that reason . the society was ruled by warriors. this elite class had resources to make themselves the best fighters/warriors . they had the teachers and books to increase their skills and offcourse the luxery of spending their time on this and let the peasants do all the other work needed. meaning they had to fight as it was their purpose in life . its once nations become bigger and more importantly more complex , bureacracy grows . the skill needed to govern the nation becomes more complex and takes priority. so kings/ nobility starts to spend their time on training other skills besides warfare, and then kings no longer fight on the field itself . because only then the thinking evolves" its stupid"because i have other skills that are more important to govern then just win battles , before that it was logical to go to war , it was your entire purpose as nobility

[@steve-qc8hd]

5:30 Winston Churchill had to be "dissuaded by King George VI not to land at Sword beach on early evening of D. Day

[@chikkinnuggits]

That's a funny image to picture. Chomping on a cigar, carrying a Bren gun, his gut ready to pop the buttons off his uniform 😂

[@steve-qc8hd]

@@chikkinnuggits There are pics of him climbing out of a DUKW a day or tow after when the Brits were sure the beach was secure. But churchill even at 66+ was still a fire-arms weirdo so a BREN would not have out of the question.

[@thegrim418]

He'd either have died immediately or been so thoroughly hammered that he'd shrug off every shot and horrify the Germans by charging their positions as an unstoppable juggernaut smoking a cigar.

[@publichearing8536]

Winston desperately staving off the desire to send anzac troops up the steepest cliff he sees.

[@victorcharlie5054]

@@chikkinnuggitswhilst I am a bit of a bren fanboy, I can’t picture this scene without his bowler hat and ribbed barrel drum mag Tommy gun

[@ronaldnelson6692]

The picture of Joan of Arc, shows her being burned at the stake for heresy while effectively proving she's a witch. Got to love AI.

[@etiennesharp]

Dr Janega is more of a scholar of the later Middle Ages, so kings in her period didn't tend to fight on the front line. She also specialises in everyday life in that era - alcohol, sexuality etc.

[@MrJpc1234]

i mean that's still wrong because even after the Late Medieval Period you had King's Fighting on the frontline like Gustavus Adolphous in the Thirty Years War....or the War of the Roses literally ending with Richard making failed charge at Henry Tudor to try and end the war The change you are talking about came around much later

[@jeffzeiler346]

Leadership meant something different then. And she doesn't get it. Not a surprise.

[@jhoughjr1]

What? A woman doesnt underdtand why men follow leadwrs in war? No way!

[@noxplay4906]

I wonder why men have ruled for tens of thousands of years

[@terrylandess6072]

So the Errol Flynn/Robin Hood color palette was correct in it's vibrancy which is mocked 'today'. :P

[@Madonnalitta1]

Only for the rich. Dyes were expensive - bright colours would have only been worn by the rich. Peasants dyed their clothes with natural pigment - so would have a washed out yellow, green, brown for colour. Flowers were used for more colour, but the colour would wash out.

[@uponeric36]

@@Madonnalitta1 Even with expensive dyes, so what? Just use less dye, put it in stripes or patterns. Not only that, but people kept, repaired, and passed down clothing far more compared today making it a better investment. Could you not also mix cheaper dyes with more expensive ones? We still use natural pigments often, there's nothing about them that's exceptionally weak compared to modern dyes. It seems to me you'd just use more dye... I'm sure the poorest struggled, but I don't think you'd have to be ultra rich for a bit of vibrant dye on your clothes.

[@MalfunctioningAndroid]

Bones are still a majority of relics.

[@DerMef]

A comment on the "job opportunities after the Black Death" thing: The actual underlying reason for the post-Black Death economic boom was the fact that farming became more efficient as less people had to be fed, and thus the land that was less productive could be abandoned. The resulting surplus of food meant that more people were free to pursue trades. There were other consequences too. Falling grain prices reduced the income and power of landowners, while cities, who were the buyers of grain, benefited and became more powerful.

[@inagaddadavidahoney]

Not to mention the surviving lower classes gaining some economic benefit from the fact that millions of the workforce were now gone in a relatively short period of time.

[@suckieduckie]

Another factor is that around the same time people started digging drainage channels to drain swampy land to make it suitable for farming and improved less suitable land that was already being farmed.

[@DerMef]

@@suckieduckie What? No, the Late Middle Ages is not when Europeans started draining swamps... In fact, most of Western Europe was cultivated when the Black Death hit, the forest cover was lower than today and the population pretty much as high as it can get with the farming technology they had at the time. That's why so much unproductive land was being cultivated.

[@uponeric36]

I've always found it funny sad - obviously losing a ridiculous percentage of your society is a major setback, like you say, farms literally being abandoned because there's not enough people left to feed - a literal shrinking of society. But of course, it helps some economic things on paper, so it's become a corner stone of anti-humanists to suggest that we'd be better off with less of them.

[@Trebor74]

Bit more to it then that. There had been 2 disasters prior to the black death. Mass death of sheep causing prices to rise,and a famine caused by heavy rain destroying crops which made the price of corn rise. The economic rise after the black death was primarily caused by the peasants realising they were as valuable,if not more so,then the sheep and corn. It was also caused by the abandonment of scratch farming on chalk hilltops as more fertile land was now available.

[@ChristinaStarlight]

Why so much hate in the comments? This professor is funny and nice. She clearly knows a lot. Why the disrespect?

[@dees3179]

Because while she knows much of the material she seems to be making jokes for the sake of being funny, rather than taking the chance to educate with a sideline of being amusing. The issue with this is many of the routes she’s going down are either actively/damagingly wrong, but could very easily be qualified and made clear. Statements about kings not fighting on the frontline when for much of history that was exactly what they were expected to do for example. Playing that for a joke and not explaining, it’s lazy and makes the episode about her comic routine m rather than her being funny while educating about history. Try watching a video on Abby Cox channel as a contrast, Almost the exact same style of humour in many ways , but more rigorously researched and evidenced. It makes a huge difference. It’s much easier to see it than explain it, so that’s probably the best way to understand. This presenter seems to be just wanting to entertain, and knows some history, but not overly interested in what the audience is taking away from the show. You compare that to Abby Cox and you’ll see something quite different as a result.

[@MalikaiDragonSlayer]

You know why, Christina. 🙃 But seriously, this is not her in class, we don't know the affect she has when she's actually teaching, I do know however I don't really enjoy KZbin videos where the reactor lectures me like a professor. I enjoy videos where the person imparts correct information *while* being entertaining. I found her presentation entertaining, if others don't, that's fine, the video isn't for them, but to act as if their "not finding her entertaining" means she's not a good educator is a wildly unfair leap in logic.

[@74357175]

Not sure, but possible because self importance/narcissism is not funny to a lot of people

[@anthonyernst999]

This is the first one I watched before Metatron made a video on it

[@erynlasgalen1949]

Wait, she's a professor of history and she talks about Henry VIII's 'divorce? Henry was never divorced. His marriages were annulled -- as if they never had existed.

[@Trebor74]

Henry had 2 wives, Seymour and Parr. He had a lot of weddings,though.

[@amyrat151]

Yes, she's talked about Henry VIII quite a bit. As someone who is fairly well read about Henry VIII, I'd say that she doesn't explain his actions accurately.

[@covahredro8370]

Her: why would Kings fight on the battlefield Oh I don't know, maybe its because men don't like following cowards. Knowing your Lord is fighting with you can inspire the men and boost morale

[@Trebor74]

Look at Harold at Hastings. Part of the reason for kings taking part in battles was that it was a giant trial by combat and God decided who won.

[@deathryder420]

she seems to have the education on the middle ages but she's too "on her high horse" shall we say in regards to her personal perspective on the topic or rather you could say she looks down on it and thinks too highly of herself and her own opinionated view

[@dms79]

Sounds like most professors.

[@noxplay4906]

I'm so glad people are calling out these modern narratives for the absolute nonsense that they are.

[@badlaamaurukehu]

She has too subjective and modernly myopic a lens to be an objective historian.

[@alexfilma16]

She has pronouns on her Instagram bio… Tells you everything you need to know.

[@Wintermute909]

Aaaand there it is. Why am I not surprised.

[@CookieTube]

Tells me everything about you if you make an objection about that.... Who the F- cares if she has pronouns or not listed in her bio? Seriously dude! _"whaaaaaa, I can't handle reading pronouns, whaaaaaa...... my nickers are all in a twist now...whaaaaaa"_ Let me call the whambulance for you...

[@jomamma1750]

Exactly!

[@Idealist_Metaphor]

Interesting what exactly does a persons pronouns tell you about them?

[@timothy4664]

She works in academia. So do I. That you would use this as an indictment and broad brush to paint over her's and anyone else's accomplishment and education tells me more about your arrogant look at the world than anything about her. Many colleges and universities strongly encourage including your pronouns. I dont know of any that require it, but it is far easier professionally to play ball than to puff up your chest and commit career suicide. That doesn't mean we all accept the ideology. Further, just because someone happens to believe in post modern gender ideological nonsense, doesn't mean they are less of an expert in their field. Frankly, you are gatekeeping "expertise" based upon unrelated subjects. That is exactly what the people you despise do. Therefore, you are no better, as are all the folk who celebrate your post. Nothing about your comment or those who love it, and rushed to thumb up is intellectually honest or based upon reason.

[@OcarinaSapphr-]

Caesar fought when he was younger- most (not all) politicians in the past had military experience, because it was an expectation that they would serve- before moving forward in their career...

[@15thcenturynoble]

About the part on the black death, chimneys did exist in the medieval period. The way they are represented in that picture maybe only became common during the 15th century as thats when we see them often in art (the square structure comming out of the roofs). But even as early as the 14th century, urban houses would have chimneys (though they weren't built like modern chimneys). In fact, even peasent houses are drawn with chimneys during the 15th century.

[@franohmsford7548]

1666 - The Great Fire of London was said to have wiped away the Great Plague. That picture would be nowhere near as bad if it was meant to be mid 17th Century. But many people do still mix up The Black Death and The Great Plague because of course we are talking about the Plague on both occasions.

[@DavidMcFarland-xc1ph]

She said they existed, just not close to super common.

[@magicpyroninja]

In our ancient history, since they weren't exactly paying people to go to battle, they needed to inspire them with their strength, their courage, and their success. On the battlefield today we give you a paycheck and say this is what we pay you to do go

[@Madonnalitta1]

Ofc they were paying. Men didn't go to war for "God and country". That's cute. Plenty of documented mutinies because the soldiers weren't paid.

[@magicpyroninja]

@Madonnalitta1 thanks for letting me know you're not familiar with this particular portion of History

[@leonardoferrari4852]

​@@magicpyroninjaWhat portion of history are you talking about? Even in you are talking about antiquity the romans did pay their soldiers. Even in the bronze age you would receive part of the loot if you fought in battle

[@evocati6523]

​@@magicpyroninjawhat is he wrong about? People were paid in various means from grain to loot even way back in antiquity. People expected to be compensated if they had to leave home where their labor was needed

[@michaeldoolan7595]

The last Monarch the English had lose their life in Battle was Richard III 22 August 1485 just after lunch.

[@leodesalis5915]

Adding to that point George the 2nd was the last English king to lead troops into battle in 1743 at the battle of Dettingen in Germany. The last king of any nation to lead their troops into battle was Albert the 1st of Belgium who led troops in WW1.

[@michaeldoolan7595]

@leodesalis5915 I was going to put that in, but I'd have to Google the date. I didn't know about the Belgium king, though cheers.👍

[@etiennesharp]

Also, the last king to die on the battlefield in Britain was James IV of Scotland in 1513.

[@michaeldoolan7595]

​@etiennesharp Flodden, I believe? I believe most of Scottish nobility died as well.

[@crashbotus]

That Lindisfarne castle is from the 16th century. The island had a church, monastery and sea faring settlement in 793 when it was raided. I think the closest actual fortress that would have been around at that time was Bamburgh Castle, a few kilometers south (but too far to be of any real help during the raids).

[@jackb1809]

20:11 actually she was captured by the Burgundian French and ransomed to the English. The 100 years war was a French civil war with some English involvement.

[@leonardoferrari4852]

It was not, there were freanchmen that sided with the english but it's not like england did not invest considerable effort in the war. Just to lose almost everything at the end

[@NicholasproclaimerofMessiah]

I think the lady's commentary about many of the monarchies being unable to learn (at 7:09), was more about the historical fact that monarchies have been very hit and miss in terms of competence and in terms of benevolence toward their people, rather than about Medieval people being stupider than Modern people. She didn't say that, anyway (not at this point in the video, anyway).

[@DragonLandlord]

We need to go back to leaders on the battlefield, there'd be less fighting.

[@garygalt4146]

It’s actually written at the time about the noise from the hand gun fired at aigincourt

[@Trebor74]

Cannon were known at crecy

[@iMightBeCrazy]

I would actually respect politicians and think their pensions might be okay if they were on the front lines in every battle without a crap load of security and actually fighting

[@kjetilhvalstrand1009]

Yeh, they might pick there batter with a bit more intellect.

[@leonardoferrari4852]

The part about security is straight up r*tarded, every king/general that fought on the field was usually surrounded by the best fighting force of the army

[@invidatauro8922]

It's the fact they don't do that which I think is a huge reason people hate them now.

[@jjohansen86]

I have to give her a little credit on the gun comment, because I think she was reading that image as a more modern firearm, and possibly she'd be happy to acknowledge the early firearms, but they didn't have guns as we do, modern firearms. Possibly this is what she meant, and I'll give her at least the benefit of that doubt.

[@cipherthevcuber]

you could probably turn everything to ash if you burn it long enough but it takes quite a bit considering crematoriums literally uses ovens and bones can survive cremation, up to 2 inches. Some Chinese have a tradition where family pickup these pieces and put them in the urn and that's how I know because I've seen it a few times myself

[@Levis_Manifesto]

Metatron- "Who would recommend AI". I think I've heard a certain Australian guy screaming in anger.

[@ArchmagosErrantCarbos]

I might could actually see Trump charging someone in gilded plate with a large T-shaped house crest lol

[@noxplay4906]

I mean he's willing to continue running for president under risk of numerous assassination attempts and bullets being fired at him, and he stood back up and pumped his fist after getting shot, I could see it too.

[@invidatauro8922]

I could too. Trump has the bombastic and self destructive personality of a medieval monarch. And since he's a populist, he'd probably have been a pretty well liked one too.

[@andystegall7407]

She is like Neil Degrasse Tyson; shes in love with the sound of her own voice and wants to be a star

[@danytalloen]

Hello, I must disagree with your comment on her comment about them not being able to learn. She doesn't say that medieval people were stipid, she said that nobility was stupuid (and not in the meaning of having a low IQ, more like being too stubborn to learn from their previous mistakes).

[@NicholasproclaimerofMessiah]

At 4:47, I think she was not looking at it from a Modern perspective, but rather she said it was "really unusual" because it is stupid; so, if it was unusual during the era, then she was speaking in regard to their perspective back then, she was speaking of why it was unusual for them. Also, you then brought up Classical nobility, so you were looking at it from a classical perspective, which is anachronistic, while she was speaking in regard to the Medieval perspective.

[@JKribbit]

I find it ironic that many of the commentors on this video are the same people Metatron criticises. They just see the clickbait thumbnail and instantly hate on this professor. I watched the whole thing and I don't see her making any inaccurate points or "rewriting history" (based on technicality at least, when she said there are no guns in the middle ages, there are but not at Agincourt). Sure she uses some words that arent orthodox in academia but shes fine, and better than many other proffessors on HH that actually has an agenda.

[@WindmillStalker]

For the few times she said something that needs a few caveats, the amount of hatred in the comments is just silly. Unfortunately rather typical for this audience.

[@goneloko1368]

Did you actually watch her video? She is 100% using the modernism fallacy throughout the whole thing. "People back then were dumb, I'm better than them" is written all over her video. Historian in name only, best she could do was argue esthetics, the rest she got wrong.

[@lytsedraak]

The hate in the comments is definitely over the top. Is she wrong about talking about medieval people being stupid? Yes. Do we need to call her stupid instead? No, we are better than that. She made good points in the video, but people prefer to focus on the bad points and rage about that. People be people I guess.

[@michaeldoolan7595]

A cannon was used at Agincourt by the French. It wasn't very effective but it did kill some English.

[@PC_Simo]

22:40 Also; why does she look like a 60-odd-year-old boarding school teacher? Wasn’t she, like, in her 20’s, when she was burnt? *EDIT:* 23:40 Exactly, Professor.

[@francikoen]

Kings were expected to lead their armies into battle and participate the fight. The Knights would NOT have fought... if the Kings did not lead personally.

[@loserinasuit7880]

That's objectively not true. The King helped morale significantly but you can't be everywhere at once and in many situations being constantly on the frontlines put the Kingdom at risk.

[@JS-wp4gs]

@@loserinasuit7880 No. You clearly do not understand what he said

[@loserinasuit7880]

@JS-wp4gs I do know what I said. It is ludicrous that you think every King was expected to fight at the frontlines.

[@Subutai_Khan]

@@loserinasuit7880 Well then you need to read more accounts of medieval battles and read up on the social hierarchy. If a king was physically able to fight he was expected to lead and be present at the battle. He would devote some command to his subordinates but he himself would be expected to lead cavalry charges too when the time was right if physically able. Without radios and other modern conveniences this is the only real way you can lead men forward. There is a reason why nobles and royals are called "those who fought" out of the three main sections of society. Kings and heads of state only stop leading armies directly in the front when armies get bigger and weapons like guns get more dangerous. If you are leading about 5,000 guys though which is the typical size of a medieval army (some are larger but this is quite typical) then you are going to be taking an active role in leading that force. Even in the wars in the New World, we see Hernan Cortes for instance, the leader of the Spanish Conquistadors leading the first cavalry charge despite the risk. Sure if the general dies it can be a bad time for structure of command especially in a feudal structure where it may be unclear who is next in charge, but it is also the best way to rally men and keep them under your control.

[@Subutai_Khan]

@@loserinasuit7880 The fact is kings in the Middle Ages were expected to fight on the battlefield. They were part of the class of people who fought much the same as other nobility and royals. I mean, there is a reason the king is a piece on the chessboard. He is always there. It is also the only way you can really lead a cavalry charge or army by being in the frontline. Obviously, as king you devote sections of the armies to other commanders but you yourself had to be actively involved and we have tons and tons of examples all throughout the Middle Ages. Even in the Early Modern period we see examples of kings on the battlefield charging. This idea only changes when modern warfare gets more dangerous and armies get so large that it is no longer practical to have a head of state leading the army from the front and there end up being more layers of command even if the head of state is present. Even if you look a bit later at battles in the New World during the Early Modern period, Hernan Cortes who was the leader of his men was the first man in the battle when they attacked the Aztecs who outnumbered them by a long shot. Hernan Cortes even killed an enemy chief with his own lance and he specifically led his men to attack the enemy Aztec chiefs. This sort of thing happened a ton especially with small forces where a general without modern comms has to be right there in the thick of it.

[@Figgy5119]

I've seen her in a few videos, and this is no dig, but I wonder if she is somewhat on the spectrum or has ADD or something. All this negativity toward her in the comments feels very over the top, even if she comes across as awkward or obnoxious with her humor. And also consider this is a video. Reactors are often told to give big over the top reactions to make an entertaining video. Videos like this are not meant as pieces of academia for seriously invested students after all. If you aren't entertained by it, it's ok, you don't have to watch it, but you also don't have to insult her either.

[@TulipFur]

What is the point of it in that case? Even if the information is surface level, general stuff, it should at least be accurate rather than just over the top half nonsense that just adds further myth to an already misunderstood period. She's not very good.

[@billrolston5800]

Speaking of Normandy, Churchill wanted to be on one of the ships during the operation

[@jonsnowight9510]

Miles off the coast, not in any danger.

[@billrolston5800]

@ six destroyers were sunk. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@invidatauro8922]

@@jonsnowight9510 Hey, still better than MacArthur.

[@viktorgabriel2554]

King Carolus lead his men on the battlefield seeing your King on the battlefield is a massive boost to moral and tended to make people fight harder since they felt like the King was willing to die for them.

[@eirrenia]

Honestly, when I think of all the politicians who are all to happy to send others to fight and die while they sit in safety, I start thinking it should be mandatory that any congress (or other political body) who votes for war or to support foreign wars be required to at least spend every other month on the battle front as a common soldier. Would it be politically dangerous? Yes. But so is having politicians who are willing to spill soldiers’ blood like its water because there is no personal cost to THEM. There is such a thing as a just war but it’s much rarer than the propagandists would like you to think.

[@Enhancedlies]

i actually like her, i normally hate these types but she seems more real. and i don't think she was as bad as it seems

[@corvanna4438]

There was a good number of English kings that died on the Battlefield. Richard the third, Harold of Hastings, Richard the Lionheart... It was a stupid idea and while many kings did fight, others sent others to fight, even among the Roman Emperors.

[@ComicRaptor8850]

Tbh, she only really said one thing that was annoying, I think all the hate she’s getting is way overblown

[@Postmortumaz]

She's talks like a teenage girl.

[@SefniAsheforr]

This is what modern academia makes of people, in tandem with social media and narcissism.

[@AkbarZeb-p6f]

That's because millennials have never left that mindset. Their boomer parents spoiled them as they are the youngest of their kids. They are boomers 2.0 & equally culturally suicidal & Marxissistic.

[@MauroGagliega]

I thought she was drunk for the first 10 mins...

[@kajkviggs]

yeah she tries to be braty some sort of rebellious. idk kind cringe.

[@KatAdVictoriam]

Her presentation and snarky speaking style make her unpleasant to listen to, for sure.

[@magicpyroninja]

The Tower in the woods serves many purposes first and foremost, expanding the line of sight of the empire and protecting the gatherers and the precious wood that they gather If also to Mark the limits of my territory and to ward off attackers

[@PC_Simo]

I’m rather surprised that the ”Black Death” -picture didn’t include the actual Grim Reaper. 😅

[@bnotapplicable7000]

That is why they were burnt at the stake. The pyres were large enough to consume bones. In modern English (America) we STILL have a particular type of fire called a 'bon fire' but the spelling didn't change with the great vowel shift so in middle English it would be called a 'BONE fire'. The heat of these can reach up to 1300F well past temps needed to consume bone.

[@redcat9436]

I'm still inclined to think that there would still be some remains left.

[@alangknowles]

The first gun used in the Battle of Agincourt in 1415 was an arquebus, a relatively light handheld firearm that could be operated by a single person. The arquebus was in use from 1410, but still required a stand to balance on. Henry V also had other artillery available at Agincourt, including: Five large guns named "Clysf", "Fowler", "Bristol", "George", and "God's Grace" A large bronze gun called "Messenger" that weighed 4,480 lbs.

[@illRun4Clownident]

They give Professorships away like candy nowadays

[@blumiu2426]

They did before. You agree with the accepted truths, you got in. The irony is people will disagree with the Progressive aspect, but not realize the evolutionary theory was part of that. The goal of removing religion from society was done different ways, but taking over science and academia is still something many still hold to because personal bias. Kind of a brilliant tactic as they understand using disbelief as a weapon.

[@MrOffTrail]

Not if you are a straight white cis male. Particularly in the humanities.

[@Rabbithole8]

@@blumiu2426 "They did before." What is the time period you are referring to? "You agree with the accepted truths, you got in." This is the part is the whole fallacy, especially when applying to the university context in the West say 10 years ago and before that. You seem to have a lot in common with her when it comes to oversimplification, biased claims, and drawing unsubstantiated conclusions. Now, if this not the case you would take what I stated and consider your stance and ask yourself questions such as, "What am I missing?" "What am I getting wrong?" In fact, you would consider that you may be wrong entirely. That is what epistemic humility is about and how we avoid fallacies and cognitive errors. That is where she goes wrong, among other reasons. Is that also your case?

[@lukeseguin1875]

Professor has always been a political position. Western academia has always had this issue. Making a compelling argument doesn't always mean you're right. The eastern Confusion civil service exams are arguably more meritoritocraric but they're even more political in practice.

[@blumiu2426]

@@Rabbithole8 The time relevant to what I was discussing. You seem to be on quite the tangent. When Darwin came up with the evolutionary theory, what were his associations, thinking and influences in which helped develop it? One can look to the French Progressive thinkers and others as academic elites and adjacent had the same goal if they weren't under the banner of Marxism. One only need examine the goals written by Marxism and other atheistic think tanks that their first listed goal was to remove religion (Christianity because the West) from society. This is known if one has cursory knowledge of it. It presents the first challenge to manipulating free thinkers because their views have a basis and foundation on immutable ground beyond one's own will and views. Those are easy to dismantle, but not against a belief that historically couldn't be stamped out even through force. Many warned the West against allowing certain individuals, groups and thinking in, one notable person recent to me is Yuri Bezmenov. We know for fact seeing how our politics, academia, military, entertainment, media and more have been infected with Communists and Marxists. This is no exaggeration given the fact it's admitted, advertised, sponsored by such activist groups, unions and those within aforementioned entities. We know from history it happened in China, Soviet Union, Africa and areas of Asia. With that explanation given, we have why science is so fortified against any other theory contending with evolution despite it's many issues and iterations it's faced with the discoveries in other areas of science. There are a bit more academics that speak out against how corrupt the institution is and knowingly peddles lies, yet as Metatron points out many times, appeal to authority and bias toward academia pervades common thinking. With how emboldened professors and students became in the past years due to ideological and political divide it's far more obvious academia is taken over and only accepts one course. We saw science be weaponized during Covid and how broken the system truly is when we know science and academia lied through it's teeth. The trust in it was shown to be low as a result. We had so many in science that came out against it and others in their fields be cast out or discredited by the establishment for telling the truth. People went along with it until the truth came out to their shame. No greater example exists of it's current state and it started decades ago if one has done their research into when fields and subjects began entering schools. What belief system do we see promoted by Communists and Marxists? Atheism. We can look at the results of that rule and effect on a society, but it's not primarily exclusive to that. Any authoritarian control will result near the same as seen with Catholic rule for over a thousand years. Didn't destroy Europe like the aforementioned did, so a significant difference. Both still targeted the religious, Christians beyond primary among them. I could go on, but that's a lot said already.

[@RedCommunistDragon]

Not a fan of this “export’s” attitude. A little sarcasm here and is fine, however, this just seems extremely unprofessional.

[@bigbro6446]

I think this attitude is acceptable for the type of video it is however, if she has this attitude while lecturing in a class of students now that’s another thing

[@sussudioharvey9458]

Back in the 70’s I had professors like this. We loved them just because they were not stodgy and pretentious . They could be dry and “ professional “ if called for. And the Ridiculous nature of the AI shown … well calls for a bit of levity and sarcasm. And don’t we enjoy Meditron just for those same reasons?

[@SupremeGrand-MasterAzrael]

James Tour is professor so nothing would surprise me. The thing about professors is: if you don’t like the professor then drop the class lol also judging this woman’s teaching ability, or James Tour for that matter, based on their behavior outside of the classroom is not productive.

[@verhalenvrouwe]

If she was doing a lecture I'd expect more professionalism. She has to rate AI images here so I think her attitude fits with the theme of the video.

[@neon-kitty]

I feel like you're both kinda wrong on the gun thing. For one, it's quite clear from context that she's talking about portable handheld guns and a lot of the examples you point to are large stationary or semi-stationary guns. Not the same thing. (She's also not saying that they didn't exist, she's saying that they weren't used in battle. Not saying that that's a correct statement but it's still not the same as denying their existence.) That being said, yes, handheld firearms did become more widespread in Europe during the 15th century which is generally considered to, at the very least partially, belong to the Middle Ages. However, arguably, the use of handheld firearms is a factor commonly used to distinguish between Medieval and Modern European warfare (and the end of the Middle Ages was a gradual process) so as a rough generalisation it kind of makes sense. But, of course, the Battle of Agincourt specifically did take place in the early 15th century and apparently there was an early type of arquebus present at it (though it probably would not have had much resemblance with what we today would call a handheld gun). So yeah, she should've been more nuanced and careful with her wording for sure but I also feel like you were a bit pedantic with taking her use of the word gun too literally.

[@private1177]

Metatron: "who would recommend AI" Shadiversity: "..."

[@gappleofdiscord9752]

Why is this woman getting so much hatred? She literally answered everything without bias and made the one tiny mistake with the guns.

[@WindmillStalker]

We both know why.

[@gappleofdiscord9752]

@@WindmillStalker I actually don't know why. Metatron's audience tends to be better than this.

[@goneloko1368]

Did you seriously miss her "I'm better than everyone in the past" attitude? She is the feminism equivalent to Fredrich Nitche. Or are you just a troll?

[@gappleofdiscord9752]

@@goneloko1368 It cropped up a little bit sure, but she was factually correct in almost every case. She's free to have her opinions on whether or not she is better than everyone in the past. So yeah, she is being overly judgmental of people in the past, I definitely condemn that just like anyone else, but it's not an objective thing so again she can believe otherwise. Also what does this even have to do with feminism or Friedrich Nietzsche(you could have looked up how to spell his name like I did)?

[@johnmacrae2006]

@gappleofdiscord9752 Her description of King Henry VIII’s reign was trash.

[@davidweiss5000]

At no point did she say all medieval people were stupid. She said that kings never learnt. I understand that you and many people here like the leadership aspect of kings going in battle with their men. Doesn’t make it wrong to say that they indeed could have been killed on the battlefield. You do you of course. But I wouldn’t question the career a person chose by a 30 minute KZbin video I saw of that person. She didn’t push her personal political views on anyone in this video. She has a special sense of humor, which isn’t everyone‘s cup of tea. But that’s true for most of the people.

[@ibrahimihsan2090]

0:36: Thank you.

[@PC_Simo]

26:30 That looks like just a photo of Lindisfarne, today 😅.

[@pete-ot4nu]

I seriously never understood the criticism of the king being on the battle field, back before standardized militaries were a thing armies would be lead by important nobility anyways, which back when the feudal system was all supreme, your nobility was the source of the kings power in the first place

[@derekhovinghoff2924]

My family runs an animal crematorium. I think I can probably answer the question of what would happen to someone's bones if they were burnt to death. If the person's flesh was incinerated, their skeleton would probably be left in a dried out and fragile state, easily ground into powder. (After an animal is cremated, their bones must be ground in a machine to reduce them to powder). So I'd expect that the bones of the person would fully decay much more rapidly and completed after they are incinerated than after any other form of execution.

[@SupremeGrand-MasterAzrael]

What if people are just stupid? Like no matter what the date is? That’s the only thing I’ve seen to be observably true about humans being stupid in my 29 years on this planet

[@davidsoulsby1102]

Many of these historians know all the facts, the dates, but can't link them to real life. Especially the historians who use sarcasm and the idea they know best often get a false sense of being right.

[@blakebailey22]

Regardless of the minor flaws in semantics she made, generative AI is abhorrent and should be shunned in all scenarios.

[@PC_Simo]

18:30 I was gonna say that, Metatron. Like, who’s that supposed to be? Rapunzel? 😅

[@erikafreebird6449]

Love your point of views..they are well studied, wise, and passionate....she on the otherhand is cocky, obnoxious, and not well spoken.

[@rpgadventurer32]

She's an obnoxious American "white liberal" woman "from California" in terms of the type of her personality. most of them are not truly educated and objectively stupid.

[@LamiNalchor]

The weird thing is I had seen her in videos 2 or 3 years ago and she was quite happy and relaxed.

[@Truffle_Pup]

I'm just glad she didn't push the whole "Joan of Arc was Trans" nonsense.

[@talithakoum3922]

Same. That "theory" is everything wrong with modern historians. St. Joan wore boys' clothing for greater mobility, and it offered better protection against SA. This is how she explained it at her trial, and it's common sense.

[@noxplay4906]

Also she was literally a pious Catholic and was canonized as a Christian saint so even suggesting that is spitting on her name. Good ole' Joan would never get down with that. God bless that woman man.

[@Whitewingdevil]

People underestimate arrows these days, gotta remember that while they might be going significantly slower than a bullet, they're also significantly heavier. Also there's a knife on there.