Richard the Lionheart - Professor Robert Bartlett

[@PeopleProfiles]

Hello guys! If you like our work please subscribe to our second channel The History Chronicles kzbin.info

[@melc9830]

Professor Bartlett is my favorite presenter of education. I saw his name and immediately had to watch it. It’s just his knowledge and talent of expression that is so good.

[@swampfox9543]

Thank you, thank you, thank you for these great videos. As an American I've never had the opportunity to be exposed to this history unless I really go out and search for it. As a father of 4 I don't have time to spend the time needed at the library, but I can listen to these great videos while I drive and learn a tremendous amount.

[@xueyingesmewang3683]

I came from the documentary of the Plantagenets. Professor Bartlett always presents with such clarity and nice structure, as a layman I cannot appreciate it more, thanks.

[@grammeb719]

Thank you, Prof. Bartlett, for an excellent presentation.

[@paulamos2817]

Superb presentation 👏 by professor Bartlett.Heres hoping for more great stories from the middle ages.

[@Augustes1]

Buy a book!

[@divanbuys1484]

I LOVE these stories told by Professors.

[@waykool698]

This professor is an Excellent story teller of history.

[@PaddyV]

Professor Robert Bartlett combines briiliant historical detail with a fantastic narrative - I really enjoy his work

[@dda40x1]

Thank you, Professor Bartlett.

[@JohnnyBlaze5100]

Beautifully told!

[@davepangolin4996]

Prof. Bartlett is a supreme presenter of history and is well under used by the TV firms. Instead they insist on using Dan Snow to present. The result is always a potted history at 'O' level standard and thats being generous.

[@paulrudd3996]

Well said. Couldn’t agree more 👍🏻

[@ryantoole2327]

Agreed! Bartlett did a great documentary series on medieval lives and the plantagenent. He's excellent!

[@The1987Kid]

I also like David Starkley

[@c.b.4916]

Exactly. Hollywood tho lol even documentaries. Dan snow looks "prettier " for TV soooooo yeah lol they pick who looks good. Ridiculous

[@domispablo7992]

Arguable but another great historian focusing on medieval England is dan jones who did a series on the plantagenets

[@susanhepburn6040]

Thank you very much for this. I have seen a TV series presented by Professor Bartlett which I greatly enjoyed and founf this video very interesting.

[@lindahouston4549]

Excellent lecture! Thank you for posting it.

[@paulineson4876]

Thanks again to Professor Bartlett. Excellent lecture.

[@patshifflett4205]

Outstanding lecture

[@aussiegirl5050]

I loved the presentation. Reminded me so much of my history lectures from university many years ago. Thank you.

[@Augustes1]

Couldn’t agree more

[@janetbate2900]

Very informative as always. Easily understood, and very enjoyable.

[@loganbagley7822]

I am grateful that Prof. Bartlett gave context to the statement that Richard only spent six months of his reign in England. Richard was a warrior king who ruled over the huge Angevin Empire, and it would make sense that he would spend most of his time where the actual fighting was, which was in his continental lands in Normandy, Anjou, and Aquitaine. I think that if he had spent more time in England like his brother John, people today would be criticizing Richard for neglecting his French lands, which were constantly under threat from French lords and nobles.

[@raghavbhatnagar2329]

Exactly England was pretty stable by this time with 3 centuries as a kingdom . Meanwhile these lands in Aquitaine were new acquisitions to the kingdom and rebellions needed to be put done to ensure they wouldn’t secede

[@nutyyyy]

He was French ultimately - much moreso than English and his principle concern was lands in France. England was a convenient possession to this end.

[@mampanevamba1614]

​@@nutyyyy not really. His French lands were the ones that had been taken while he was captive. He needed to take them back.

[@kenduffy5397]

Great stuff, great presentation!

[@aarondemiri486]

lion in winter is a superb play and the film with Peter O'toole is fantastic one of the first historical figures I ever learned about and one of the men who I enjoy learning the most about

[@danielschaeffer1294]

For my money his best performance,,with a stellar supporting cast and a superb script.

[@kbflorida888]

‘ I had no sons.’ ‘I had but 3 wiskered things, but no sons’.

[@TomFynn]

"Well, what shall we hang? The holly or each other?"

[@darylhaire7189]

Love the format of these videos. Nothing fancy just good narrative history.

[@AASN19]

Your the greatest Professor

[@johndavenport8843]

Very well done, Thanks

[@betsyross2.065]

You couldn't begin to have hoped for a better course at a world class university....

[@petah-peoplefortheendlesst4668]

I loved Bartlett's Plantagenets docuseries

[@betsyross2.065]

That was an amazing series,along with his series on the Normans...

[@josephcollins6033]

Thank you!!!!

[@ShayStar]

There is almost no mention of Eleanor of Aquitaine. I thought she was instrumental in raising the ransom money for his release and she brought Berengaria of Navarre to Richard on his way to the holy land.

[@betsyross2.065]

Megan Markle, the current Eleanor of Aquitaine...lol

[@SKILLIUSCAESAR]

There’s only so much he can cover in an hour… the specifics behind raising the ransom isn’t that relevant to his overarching story 🤷🏻‍♀️

[@AliRadicali]

I think it's a fair criticism of Richard that he did not marry and conceive an heir before leaving for the crusades. Had he left an heir, even just an infant, his enemies would have had a much harder time rallying support during Richard's captivity because the succession would be secure, making their own claim to the throne weak (and his own bargaining position that much the stronger). And sure, sometimes might or treachery still prevails in a dynastic dispute, but the lack of an heir made John and Arthur's positions unnecessarily strong. It created uncertainty, which could then be exploited by opportunists like John and Philip Augustus. It just seems like a dereliction of one of the principal duties of a monarch. It is all the more important for an absentee monarch to leave a successor because without one, any contender is a very short step from the throne. A secure base of power discourages dissent and shall we say, "ambitious" thinking.

[@samright4661]

King Philip was Mad Because Lionheart wouldn't marry his Sister ...Prof Barlett is a national treasure... John is the reason for the Manga Carta.. The Worst King Ever..

[@kkandsims4612]

I mean it lowkey was a good thing a king having absolutely all the power is horrifying no person she have have that much power and the Barron’s knew it .

[@whaleymom76]

This is interesting. The story I always heard of Richard's death was that a young boy who was with Richard's forces shot him by accident and Richard forgave him.

[@jamesbodnarchuk3322]

Very interesting!

[@robertbruce7686]

A new role for Brian Blessed!

[@nicholasbethell2921]

Happy families!

[@michaelsinger4638]

Richard I: Great warrior. Not so good as a King though.

[@warwickkingmaker2035]

Precisely. I dont understand how anyone would call him their favourite king when he was in fact poor at it. There are far more competent warrior kings of the english monarch like Edward I and Edward III.

[@mampanevamba1614]

Why was he not a good king?

[@Kunfucious577]

There really is no reason to go to university today.

[@betsyross2.065]

100 percent true....

[@Chris-ut6eq]

depends on your desired profession. For the layman, this kind of learning is great.

[@melc9830]

More please.

[@kofokss]

Good video

[@Leftatalbuquerque]

He also looked a lot like a young Anthony Hopkins.

[@maryearll3359]

More please 🤶

[@gabrielazavacka2669]

Hello, can anyone tell me what reforms King Richard made regarding the courts and the chancellor? it is said that he has modernized it, thank you. I know about measures, about tournaments, and about the protection of Jews. but I don't know what laws regarding the judiciary.

[@catspaw3815]

'You'd better behave yourself, or I'll set the King of England after you!'

[@gabrielazavacka2669]

why richard lion heart dont go tu hungary? budin, pressburg, moravia to sas where lived his sister matilda?

[@ConstantineJoseph]

Why are you promoting a Chicom type credit score digital financial product? This is the stuff of 1984

[@susanpower-q5q]

Thank you Professor Bartlett for information on Bishop of Salisbury Hubert Walter who visited Brave King Richard held prisoner at Trifels Castle in Germany It would be interesting to know who else visited the Lionheart in prison? Also Is there any possibility Queen Berengaria was barren? Another King of England Charles II had no male heir or child by his Queen and refused to repudiate her as result /Charles II left legion of illegitimate children but remained married My only disappointment in all Documentaries I have yet seen about The Only Crusader King of England is total Lack of Wider Historical Larger Christian Context Especially relating to Both Emperor of The East Constantinople as well as Emperor of the West who tragically were both hostile to Richard quite Incredible in view of their title as Defender of Christendom being their primary purpose and surely by their hostility even harmed The worldwide Empire of Christ A Sacred Holy Empire As commanded by Our Divine Saviour final words recorded in Saint Matthew

[@williamanderson8932]

Freddie Mercury.

[@shaunmetzgar9302]

👍👍👍

[@katherinecollins4685]

Very interesting

[@blake121666]

He's wrong about the power of crossbows. A wartime longbow is typically significantly more powerful than a crossbow. A crossbow is ridiculously inefficient. It draws the arrow only about 6 inches whereas the longbow draws it 2 feet or more. So the crossbow draw-weight needs to be about 4 times that of a longbow - and it still doesn't end up being more powerful than, say, a 160 lb crossbow due to various other factors. But a 160 lb longbow is not an easy bow to use. People think crossbows are more powerful because of their draw-weights - not realizing how inefficient they are compared to a simple longbow. The advantage of the crossbow is the low skill required to use it and be accurate with it - not its power (which is typically less than a longbow). Power-wise and in actual real-life scenarios, it takes something like an 850 lb windlass crossbow to equal the power of a 120 lb longbow.

[@jannarkiewicz633]

Richard I is just such wasted potential. And of course it lead to Richard II

[@merlinwizard1000]

81st, 15 September 2024

[@rockstar450]

Ah the French guy who’s only English policy was to set it up as a tax farm to do “God’s work” then bailed on “God’s work” at the last moment because it might have cost him something. Brilliant general but how do you defend a man who’s ego spent all his subject’s money on promising Jerusalem at all costs and then just left when he ‘may’ have actually suffered. He betrayed his family, executed hostages in the holy land and his reputation is only thanks to ridiculous stories of him fighting on the front line. Think of all he could have done for England if he’d been a king with their money…

[@mampanevamba1614]

Richard was not the only king to go on crusade but he was one of the more successful. He made terms with Saladin because he wasn't going to defeat him. Seriously you people just like to be edgy.

[@ligayamatira2164]

We Wish to Feature President Ferdinand E. Marcos of the Philippines

[@DonCorleone803]

Isn’t the king get kicked by Salah Adina…!

[@DonCorleone803]

@@erikmacleod9934 it's simple go look the fact ( History can't be changed) and you should know that by now ?

[@DonCorleone803]

@@erikmacleod9934 Salah Eddine open and took back the holy land of palastian did he not ? And that Richard was ambush on wood 🪵 before get back to england !! That Richard killed so many 🤔 men's without Sord on exchange he was nothing compar to Salah Eddine and history prove that ... But is out of context to original of subject ?

[@galatzy01]

@@erikmacleod9934 And even with those 'glorious' victories, he didn't take back Jerusalem, you know the main goal of the crusade. So whatever Saladin lost those battles, he won the war.

[@richardpaschal2218]

@@galatzy01 Richard realized he had to return and conquer Egypt and then Jerusalem would change hands and this state could be maintained long term. Philippe Augustus and his duplicity destroyed his plan.

[@galatzy01]

@@richardpaschal2218 It doesn't change the outcome, Saladin by merely holding Jerusalem won the war. We can find as many excuses we want to absolve Richard however his own behaviour facilitated the outcome Putting down the standard of the duke of Austria at the end of the siege of Acre was a stupid move, deprieving the crusade of the German contigent and came back to bite him in the ... when he was captured by the same duke later. The ransom bankrupted the Angevin Empire, dooming any attempt for John to keep it together and giving a field day for Philippe to destroy it. Choosing over Conrad of Montferrat to maintain Guy of Lusignan as king of Jerusalem, the same man who was crushed at Hattin and provoked the downfall of the kingdom alienated half of the forces present in the Levant, mind you in the end, he accepted that Conrad should be the next king, but it was far too late for the crusade. Keeping secret his intentions for attacking or not Jerusalem also alienated the duke of Burgundy, the leader of the French contigent of crusaders after Acre. I believe the worse is the guy had everything for him, Richard was a gifted great fighter, heir of the richest French holdings and king of an efficient and centralized England, he was most certainly on paper the most powerful and richest man of Europe. But in terms of strategy and politics, he was so useless that it is infuriating to see how he wasted everything. At the opposite, if we look at what Philippe started with, a title of king on paper with meager holdings around Paris and Orléans and what he ended with, Isle de France, Normandy, Anjou, Maine, Poitou, Artois, Berry, Auvergne and Brittany back in the French fold, arguably taking the mantle from Richard as the most powerful man in Europe, we see clearly the difference between a great king and Richard.