Evilanious you’re a Smart One!!! Nice. Lol

No they only ate the live ones....

zztop3000 dont you value your hands?

@Forsaken Pumpkin Cannibalism at the siege of Ma'arra has been disputed numerous times as there is no written accounts by the muslims of that ever happening.

In all seriousness you can't just eat every animal that dropped dead. Many horses probably died of disease and weren't safe to eat, and I ain't eating the same horse that caused Baldwin in the next tent over to cough up his entire stomach even if im starving.

r/itemshop

👉 If you are interested in history & mysteries stories then my last video is for you ✨👌🤩🤩🤩

😂🤣😂🤣

Yup!

Crusader kings? lol

At least he’s not a selfish PoS like Bo

Alexander the Great my dude. The battle of gaugamela is so much more tedious and larg

The amazing Nugget true he’s got some epic battles as well

Why would they continue to ration right before a battle? They had a big feast. It's what troops would often do before going over the top in WW1, and before attacks in WW2. Even if the food is limited, they know there's going to be deaths (reducing consumption after battle), so they gorge.

because Deus Vult my friend, Deus Vult!

@@Usammityduzntafraidofanythin They didn't have three days of feast, but three days of fast which is completely the opposite. In a fast, people deprive themselves of food in order to gain control over their will by voluntarily eating less than what is necessary, sometimes nothing at all.

Historia Civilis does the same thing

Monsters, the both of them! What do they think, that the suffering and anguish of ms paint squares is entertaining?!

Joseph Joestar yeah!

The boxes (for those who don't know) represent NATO representations of different types of solider. Boxes with a cross inside are infantry while a box with a single line is cavalry :)

yeah.... thanks

Considering everything that could go wrong and the things that did go wrong, I am amazed their devotion and eventual success on retaking Jerusalem.

@@vanguardguardian5876 They thought their lives filled with sin would be forgiven if they went out and slaughtered even more people. I don't have a lot of respect for the crusaders :P

@@vinnieg6161 completely irrelevant btw

@@vinnieg6161 they stopped islamic expansion and massacres at least for a while

It's pretty amazing how things turned out in the end. He wanted to become a ruler for his own personal gain, but that action diverted that huge Muslim force, which delayed reinforcements long enough for the siege to succeed. If not, who knows. Maybe the crusades would've ended right then and there.

It seems at least halfway mythological and made up to me. Chances are, the turks didn't bring 35,000 soldiers to confront a small unit of heavy infantry. But they did seem to be disorganized, possibly inexperienced with siege warfare (which, I guess the normans had maybe one or two generations of experience with).

It was not a small unit of heavy infantry. The Crusaders probably put nearly all of their forces out of the city to confront the muslim army. Nearly 15.000 to 20.000 men. At this point the muslim army was probably already reduced by the siege. So they had less than 35.000 men on the field. Probably most of these men were unexperienced and had rather low moral. Also most of them were probably drafted in hurry to deploy an army in time. The problem of the seliuq army becomes especially clear if you consider that most of the troops already have seen defeat by the crusaders earlier. Than the seliuq army attacked the crusaders with smaller units and which got beaten. Its no wonder that the army routed after they come in contact with the experienced crusader troops who had everything to lose. The seliuq troops didnt wanted to die and they had the chance to get away. Their homes were not directly in danger after all. In addition to that was the leadership in the army divided. Which caused confusion and hindered decision making. All in all I think that its not that unbelievable or as you called it "mythological". In history there were more battles with badder odds for the victorious site.

lol....they were muslim fanatics TO A MAN....jihad is sacred duty ....you dolt.....what won was the ferangies war horses....they are twyce the size of a thoroughbred arabian

dont think that they were levies im pretty sure that that the arab armies of the time were largely professional The Crusades: The Authoritative History of the War for the Holy Land by Thomas Asbridge is an excellent read on all facets of the holy land during the crusades

Source?

Dude, its Bohemond.

"pretended"

*Just a meme!*

Source is God.

First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.

amen

Right. One. Two. Five.

Three, my Lord!

... right! Three!

"Exterminates populace"

craven horse son that he is

Jaqen H'ghar Valar Morghulis

valar dohaeris

A man enjoyed this video

a man was looking for a comment like this

a man knows his shit

Stephen Murphy Excuses lol,God was in the christians side that's why Turks were beaten so badly,faith and moral are everything deus vult

Ooookkkkkk....what's your point? Armor effectiveness doesn't care if you're a conscripted or a regular troop. What a random ass comment.

It's hard to believe that they could gear up 1000 troops in chainmail though. Seriously, they had water mills, but I don't think they had those wire coiling devices that would show up in the later middle ages.

maybe they didn't value armor as much as european armies did

> It's hard to believe that they could gear up 1000 troops in chainmail though. They did not gear up anyone, the upper soldiery who joined already had their own equipment from the start. The mail armors worn would be produced over decades or even centuries until this crusade happened and just piled up in circulation for many to eventually wear in battle.

3 years later i doubht it now, with maybe a little rare chance to find it

What you call hostile lands were populated mostly by Christians lol. "ineptitude of muslim armies"? 6.000 Turks vs. 50.000 Crusaders in the battle of dorylaeum and yet Crusaders suffered more casualties (4000 Crusaders died vs 3000 Turks died), you call that "ineptitude? Antioch was also populated by hostile christian population, only the garrison was Turkish. That's why an Armenian betrayed and opened the gate.

No need to take it seriously, I was just joking of how lame it was and how many stupid mistakes both parties took.

not at all made up I'm sure *cough*

> 6.000 Turks vs. 50.000 Crusaders Yeah, but the Turks engaged a number of separate armies that totaled that number, not all at once. Also, the 3000 lost by the Turks were all expensive cavalrymen, difficult to replace, while crusaders lost mostly levied commoner infantry. The Count of Bloius states in his letters that his section had heavy casualties, lost over 500 men, but only 2 of those were knights.

Bohemond's army alone (20.000) was still much larger than the Turkish army led by Kilij Arslan (6.000). And the relief force made things even worse and changed the course of the battle. Expensive cavalrymen? The bulk of the Turkish army were Turkish tribesmen fighting as horse archers, what "expensive cavalry" are you talking about? Only a very small part of the army were made up of Sultan's elite ghulam who were heavy cavalrymen. "The Count of Bloius states in his letters that his section had heavy casualties, lost over 500 men, but only 2 of those were knights." That's because knights were only a small part of Crusader armies, unlike what we see in Hollywood movies. The Crusader armies were mostly consisted of infantrymen.

"I don't like sand" - Thoros

Blaze MacArthur "i hate sand" - Anakin Skywalker

"You are like wet sand in my underwear." -Cindy

"Because Fuck you, that's how" - Geoffrey of Bouillon

Anatolian plains are not deserts, nor there is a significant amount of sand though.

he definetly didn't invent the tactic of holding a force in reserve

Most of the crusaders were Franks (French), well even Normans are French.

L0rd0fLight normans=vikings

o shit, wadup

Aviticus Petasius Heyyyy man

Normans were Vikings not Mediterranean like you. They were your masters like Bohemond became master of Levantines in Antioch after setting up his principality.

Kean Cyrell De Jesus mot many people have great taste mate.. DEUS VULT!

@Otto come on man let this dude fangirl out over the first crusade

@@all_the_bad_news5614 but he's right tho, Crusader are more equiped in battle than the seljuk's army compost of inexperienced and under equiped troops. Especially most were just recruited so fast and early.

Lannister Tancred (his nephew) surpassed him in every way though.

I agree, just check up Tancred, he's the man ;) Just two facts for you : - Of all the crusaders, he alone avoided to have to swear the oath to Alexios, because he used the cover of darkness to cross into Anatolia unoticed, in a small boat. - When the conquered Jerusalem (oh, spoilers alert), he was the only one to try and protect the civilians, christians, jews and muslims alike. Alas he couldn't do much to stop the blood bath.

I belive he became one of the most victorious Lords... and it was only because Baudiuin the I was a cunning fox with diplomacy that Jerusalem remained the seat of power. Tancred had control over Eddessa at a point, and one of the heirs to Tripolis offered to become his vasal. Which would have made Antiochia the seat of power. But Bauduin I managed to split Tripolis btw two fighting brothers, who then didnt need to be a vasal under Antiochia, and by giving him some land he got Eddessa back to Baudiun the 1 of eddessa (who later became bauduin the 2 of Jerusalem) its confusing with all the Bauduins.

he is not a dude you are a Dude he is a MAN

Turks lacking halbediers and poor infantry tech line made them lose the battle, fucktards didnt invent janissaries back then xD

France campaign go brrrr

Interesting about the pronunciation. Always thought it was BLEW-AH like so: forvo.com/search/blois/

Basically, normans were rabid individualists who could never truly get along. Fortunately, there was a lot to conquer, so they didn't have to fight amongst themselves, I guess.

BS. You should read something about it. Try Thomas Madden books.

And bohemund is pronounced Bo He (as in hell) Mund

Master Vengco at this point you either live under a rock for a decade or you are a fans, there is no other choice.

Not really. I've watched a few episodes, then got bored and never went back to it. Not everyone has to like it.

Or you just don't care about mainstream pop.

No, I watch a lot of mainstream series. I just couldn't get invested in this particular one.

I would certainly hope so, unless the video about Roberts rebellion was for no reason

yes

Weird But Cool Black Man old memes actually contestualized ftw

The gauls did it to Ceasar first. Or the other way around, depending how you see it.

DeLaRuuu now I'm really confused

I think he's talking about the siege of Alesia, where Caesar encircled Vercingetorix' army within the walls of Alesia by building a giant wall around it, and then building a second wall behind the first one to repel any Gauls from attacking the besiegers, but then the Gauls besieged the besieging besiegers. This battle holds a big part in my thesis. It's hugely interesting.

Kevin DeRuiter ah yes, Alesia

Who cares? The Christian’s won. (:

They libarels only support PPL against Europeans and xtianity

Wtf are you on about??? Both are ludicrous tales and this is a channel focused on battle tactics. Not hocus pocus

A spear piercing Christ is not ludicrous.

​@@NormanKnight-rp9je Finding the specific spear that did it though?

AVE MARIA +

ryang58 God wills it!

Holy comments, blessed by the pope.

Indeed, retards incoming...

Carlos N you're already here though

Samurai Jack because of the other commanders didnt charge they hated Kerboga you should read it in vikipedia

Or armor, experience, and high morale because beside religious fervor, they had nothing to lose. I'm surprised that people can fight that well after 3 days without eating, though.

SpyMonkey3D yeah armor experience but crusaders defeated by seljuks so bad that they didnt go levant through anatolia again As I said I read lots of things and watched lots of videos about it, first of all numbers cant be %100 true, second, the army didnt all belong to Kerboga, it was a union. The others hated Kerboga and they didnt attack with him, they acted like they were deserting

Dex4Sure yeah, that made them charge but the reason of their succes is, the seljuk army was just like the crusders. Not a single army. Other commanders hated Kerboga and they didnt charge into enemy. They actes like they were deserting. Its politics. Once great seljuk empire splited into pieces. They didnt really help to Sultanate of Rum. But later Sultanate of Rum defeated crusaders very badly. Like Crusade 1101

Abdul Al Malik you are right but I was saying it was a unification army like crusaders, other commanders abandon kerboga

but franks don't get hussars

only light cav smh

Turmunhk Ganba coming down the mountainside

To the tune of the rohirrim from lord of the rings.

i would improve my army to neavy seals before this attack then i would ask Gandhi for tactical nuke

The UndercoverMan friends ? Your damn race invaded Europe, enslaved 17 million Christians and took our holy city in the past, and now it's invading us again, killing us, and wanting to be friends? go fuck yourself

I only see "Deus Vult" and not people talking against Islam here

A few people are arguing about Europe and it's state.

We have the right to talk bad about Islam as we talk bad about christians too. There's no place for religion in 2017.

His name is literally Erwin Rommel, what do you expect?

\[T]/

DEUS VULT

DEUS VULT

Ave Maria

NON NOBUS DOMINE

TowarzyszSowieta Iesus Tyria regit mundi

TowarzyszSowieta DEUS VULT!!

GOD or any deity....HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

es la voluntad de Dios

TowarzyszSowieta nfnd

Me, an uneducated historian who has studied history and read personal reports for my entire life : "the holy lance was used to boost the christian army's morale for one last stand" You, an intellectual who spends his days watching videos and playing video games : "nah it was real man"

Yeah right

"Uneducated historian" So do you pull shit out of your ass or what?

Jokes are like intelligence, not everyone gets it.

The realness of the lance is insignificant , what matter is the people's belief.

المسلم الموحد. the crusaders were just mad in the head lol

yeah, and also this was the golden age of armoured knights and infantrymen, and they were also very tough to break and it would have been a very costly offensive for the Turks, they didn't want to remain stuck in melee with dismounted knights and decided to leave them be

He's descended from Vikings

Evan Nesbitt no

Viking tradition mixed with French cavalry (which was the best of europe), the Normans were almost unbeatable.

@@alpcankarademir1991 yes, read

Evan Nesbitt no

Luke Michael They have great quantity but could really use some better quality of infantry.

Luke Michael They will get a buff.....some hundreds of years later.

The Rising Theurge Now they got nerfed, not even playable, they can't even win wars anymore.

Chris Hansen Well they still played very well and not all is lost. after ISIL's fall in the ME, the Turks could use it to regain their powers.

They don't need a buff, they just need to learn how play their units.

wait, so all those Antioch Baptist church are named after battle that kills tons of people? great, more death and killing, SHeez wen will the bronze age end? give us Peace!

God does not will any war or killing, actually. The Son of man came to save mens lives, not to destroy them.

read the bible much?

It's "save their souls"....hence "purification by fire"...remember.?

god who..?!?

OR 1683 VIENNA !!!

Quetzalcoatl hence why I said "Italo- Norman". This is the term that historians use. Normans had been living in southern Italy since 999 at least , by that time they were a bit italianised and they had mixed with Italian nobility. Bohemond himself had an Italian mother, and his nephew Tancred had an Italian father. Why do you have against Italians you fucking troll ?

Alberada of Buonalbergo? Her mother was French, a Burgundian. His spouse was also a French. The French elites tended to marry each other. Most of elites in Sicily and England were actually French. Their ethnicity was French. They would separate themselves from the Italians.

Quetzalcoatl my bad, Alberada was actually French, I consfused her with Adelaide of Vasto. However , it remains true that the Normans were slowly becoming italianised by the late 11th and early 12th centuries. Roger II's mother , Adelaide of Vasto, was Italian . Norman nobles often married Longobard nobles. Robert Guiscard married Sichelgaita of Salerno. Again , Tancred of Lecce's father was Odo , an Italian marquis. That's why they are called "Italo - Normans".

Tancred father was from the House Hauteville. They were all French again. They just took local names just like the Plantagenet did in England or historians gave them local names. For example William of the Conqueror didn't call himself William but Guillaume (his French name). Sometimes the French would marry non-french but these were usually powerful houses. The French did control most of Western Europe in those days.

Quetzalcoatl Wrong, Tancred's father , who was called "Odo the gold marchis", was an Italian nobleman. Not much is known about him but he was apparently north Italian. Anyway , I'm not denying the Normans were originally a French people, I think it's common knowledge nowadays.

François Calvaresi yeah but the first crusade is the only successful one. the vid didn't mention that a section of the Christian army resorted to cannibalism after the siege of antioch. they ate the buttocks of dead Turks and spit roasted them even though they werent even fresh pretty grim. the tactics they used to conquer Jerusalem is even more impressive. I hope this guy makes a vid of it. but the sacking of Jerusalem was incredibly gruesome. as bad as what the Romans did

Mitch Manta There are no evidence of the cannibalism story, as far as I know. Indeed the siege of Jerusalem was cruel. The Third Crusade was also partially successful as it failed to reconquer Jerusalem but stopped Saladin to destroy the Crusaders.

François Calvaresi scribes chronicled the events of cannibalism. look them up yourself if you're interested. but the essential goal of recapturing the holy land was not successful so in that regard, it was a failure. especially considering Richard the Lionhearts throne was stolen by his brother and he died on his quest home.

Mitch Manta sacks like jerusalem were common back then

"but the first crusade is the only successful one." - The Venetian crusade, the Norwegian crusade, the third crusade, the German crusade of 1197, the sixth crusade etc. were all crusader victories.

If you raised your son better instead of going to battle after battle in France, there would be no Wars of the Roses.

SuperDash DEUS VULT

Desu vault.

Allahu akbar, same shit, other language... Feel retarded yet guys?

Carlos N no and I never will

@@wereNeverToBeSeenAgain No, Deus is a great god, Allah is a fictional moon pimp.

And so can be said for Jesus

@@germanicus7958 you understand because someone is Muslim dosnt mean Allah will automatically let him win right its much more complicated than that its like me saying to any battle the Christians lost WhErE wAS jEsUs tHeN hUH