I can't believe I came upon this lecture just now with it being out this long... This is the best video about the intentions of the first Crusade and the mindset of the religious people of the time. Most of modern society is really ignorant about the intelligence and humanity of folks from a thousand years gone by. Freakin awesome video, dude ☩ 👍

In 8 years of Catholic school, I had been taught all of the major Bible stories, Old Testament and New Testament. So when I started reading the Bible myself, decades later, the stories were familiar. And most other Catholics were also taught the Bible stories...at least until 1970 and the changes of Vatican 2. We just did not memorize book, chapter and verse. I can imagine most people in the Middle Ages also knowing the stories of Old and New Testament.

@D_Marrenalv

5 жыл бұрын

To the contrary, the average "laymen" by the time of the "Middle Ages" knew very little of the Scriptures, if at all, since the Church forbade the possession -- let alone the reading -- of the Bible by any non-cleric or noble. In fact, in that time, the Scriptures were in Latin, a language that most laymen didn't speak nor read, except clerics and noblemen & their women/children. If average lay persons knew anything of the Bible (some Bible accounts, some token scriptures, or concepts), it was what had been taught to them directly and ONLY by their local priests or monks or lords, not through personal study, reading, or "Sunday Schools".

@jvercouillie

Жыл бұрын

@@D_Marrenalv Are you sure ? How do you know that only clerics and nobles read the Bible ? And, actually, people could very well listen to the Gospel at Mass every day and learning it by heart...

@D_Marrenalv

Жыл бұрын

@@jvercouillie Back in the Middle Ages? Except for priviledged & highly educated people (meaning monarchs & their children/family & nobles, and certainly clerics), the great majority of Western Europeans had no practical knowledge & understanding of scriptural Latin, and certainly no access to any Bible, even if some lay people could understand some basic Latin. I'd say the same for the majority of Eastern Europeans regarding biblical Greek--again, except for their privileged clerics and monarchs.

@jvercouillie

Жыл бұрын

@@D_Marrenalv I know from experience that it is not necessary to speak latin to understand it. As a native French speaker, I can understand Latin in some extent (in Psalms, for example), it is not very difficult. And I can imagine that some people hearing Latin everyday (or almost) could begin to understand some repeated parts of the Gospel, especially if they usually speak some language close to Latin. The Gospel was also pictured on stained glass, on frescoes on the walls, on statues and sculptures, and of course, it was probably subject of conversations between clerics and people, like Saint Felipo Neri liked to do.

Thank you for making such great content about the crusades, when I was younger I was really into the crusades and I thought they were awesome and whatever, and then I began to buy the message that they were horrible wars and unjustified just Christians killing for no reason. One day I found your channel and you have re sparked my interest in the crusades and reinforced my thought before I started to believe all the lies told about the crusades. So I would like to personally thank you for the hard work that you do in this channel in sharing the true story of the crusades. DEUS VULT.

@RealCrusadesHistory

6 жыл бұрын

thanks so much for the great comment!

@josephdimen4278

5 жыл бұрын

Do be careful friend. Saying the crusades as anything other than the mainstream narrative will get you ostracized.

@davehallett3128

5 жыл бұрын

@@josephdimen4278 he was probaly ostracized by the doctor when he was born

This was by far one of your best episodes. Especially the points on violence in the name of religion then vs. now.

@the4universes207

2 ай бұрын

I sitll in support of violance in the name of religion. I beleive god wants to defend my family and commnuty by just and holy, only to protect. Jesus brought the verse, " I did not come wth peace but a sword".

It is simply a fact that in a fallen world wars must be fought. When "good" men do nothing to stop evil, evil prospers. It is a man's duty to God to combat evil. And countries at times must fight in order to uphold the justice of God.

Im glad of how much content you update every week

Thanks to you now "Spiritually meritorious" is my new favorite expression I'll use for anything from playing World of Warcraft to napping to leaving comments on KZread ♥️

Thank you, Steven.That was a masterly survey, and perhaps the best short treatment of the topic that I have ever heard or read.

@RealCrusadesHistory

6 жыл бұрын

Wow thanks William!

This video is really a key to understanding a lot about what was going on in these conflicts. So glad to have this very important information. Thank you.

@RealCrusadesHistory

6 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

Just remember that when you ask me "What Would Jesus Do" that flipping tables and wipping people is in the realm of possibility.

@JP-rf8rr

5 жыл бұрын

I know what you're talking about. John 2:15 "So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle" Since it's specifying sheep and cattle its likely he didn't use it on humans. And since the verse says it was to drive them away from the temple. It's probably was no different than ranchers moving livestock into pins. And since when was fliping a table violence? At most thats vandalism, and since there is no indication that the table was damaged it probably wasn't even that.

@davehallett3128

5 жыл бұрын

Yeah he was flipping tables not real estate jim and tammy mascara and jimmy swagger and oral robberies and robert full of schuller and creflo dollarsign and any pope or cardinal sin and any other false profiteer out there. Flipping tables

@dosran5786

5 жыл бұрын

@@JP-rf8rr uh he whipped the money lenders.....for insulting god.

@dosran5786

5 жыл бұрын

@@davehallett3128 now in english loser.

@JP-rf8rr

5 жыл бұрын

@@dosran5786 uh no he didn't, he whipped sheep and cattle. Where does it say that he whipped the money lenders?

[13:00 ->] The Bible says to the Christians “love each other” / “love one another” 10 times for each times it says “love your enemy”. This means that the people of the Middle Ages were correct in thinking it’s the will of God to fight one’s enemy in order to protect one another.

@toddcampbell-crow8615

4 жыл бұрын

@Kevin Love And yet, it's the Mongols who burnt Baghdad.

you are seriously better than all the evangelists of today I think I see a new career field for you to explore

This is the best most indepth channel i've ever found on a time period. I got into the crusades and medieval warfare because of Stronghold games. This stuff is very interesting. Awesome content!

@RealCrusadesHistory

5 жыл бұрын

thanks so much glad you like it

@Thor-Orion

4 ай бұрын

Yeah, he’s the best! This is always the channel I recommend when anyone expresses interest in the crusades, I do a lot of tabletop war gaming and my group does a lot of historical period gaming and this channel is an indispensable resource for my friends and I when we’re building our armies to represent the various forces of the Middle Ages, not even confined to just the crusades, although that’s obvious his foremost speciality. The 3-D printer was such a huge blessing for those of us who collect and play tabletop, it has enabled my group to make so many in house armies that when we host friends that aren’t yet into the hobby themselves can use to get introduced to the games, and it wouldn’t have been possible without the 3-D printer, as collecting use to be very cost prohibitive. I bring that up to say that finding this channel was a lot like getting my first 3-D printer, just so much inspiration and he’s got great narrative ability that really hooks you as a listener and brings the history to life. I’m sure he gets tired of reading my gushing comments singing his praises, but I like to be as encouraging as possible to those who have inspired me and brought such value to our communities. And from everything I can tell about him as a man (although admittedly I do not know him personally at all, it’s just a sense I get from watching and listening to how he presents himself) he had good character and is a positive influence on his in-person community as he is to our on-line community.

Thank you for calling out the incredible bias of Runciman

The music, art, and your knack for narration really makes me interested in a period I always looked down on (antiquity FTW!).

Such an underrated channel

This is by far your best video. Have more like these.

Excellent job explaining just war. Thank you for that.

Very informative video, I like to know how people thought at the time, it is a very important part of understanding history.

If the Enlightenment stripped the West of its concept of holy war and cultural conflict, does that mean other cultures who have not gone through something comparable to the Enlightenment still have these concepts?

@lavish_1717

5 жыл бұрын

Yes like the Muslims

Salutations. Reference to thou shalt not kill. During a study into Jewish mythology I read from what I understand as a reliable source that our English translation from the original Hebrew is weak. It would be better written as don't kill without just cause or reason.

Amazing video! Can you make a video talking about the Spanish Christian military orders?

Great podcast, thank you.

To be fair, Augustine, in his On the Freedom of the Will, said that not even self-defense was valid. He said this because he had a very broad and serious view on "lust". For Augustine, "lust" was desiring anything other than God more than it is due. This includes everything from your own life, your family, and friends, etc. Think of the passage where Christ says to reject your parents if they prevent you from following Him. So killing someone to protect your own life, or even your families lives, is not valid because it means that you are willing to kill out of desire for yourself or family. This is inordinate and would be considered "lust". Augustine, at this period, would have certainly rejected any form of war on behalf of the Church or God/God's Law as well. He would say that even if the war was supposedly for God it would most likely not be because humans are so limited in their capacity to understand the true will of the infinite and eternal God. This response is just meant to give a better counter to what you say at the middle of the video. Augustine does change his view later to what you state, but this original rigorous view does make complete sense logically even if it is a very rigorous view (as Augustine tends to be).

@williamcrawford7621

6 жыл бұрын

Terra Tremuit Yet, rigerousness is a sin itself. Just look at the Pharisees who prided themselves on following the law to the letter such that they missed the whole point of the law! Augustine rightly changed his view on this.

@jamestown8398

5 жыл бұрын

Augustine was a smart guy, but not all his ideas were winners.

Love your enemy, hate the wicked.

I always interpreted "turn the other cheek" as being about ignoring insults and disrespectful behavior, preventing such superficial indignities from escalating into unnecessary violence, not refusing to defend yourself. While loving your enemy is about not denying the humanity of those with whom you are in conflict, so that you do not reduce yourself into monstrous behavior. I find it odd that anyone would ascribe these as only applying only to members of Christendom, as the bible is pretty clear about the fact that you are meant to treat unbelievers with kindness and respect, so that through you, they may come to believe. Thane again I did not grow up in the harsh and unforgiving middle ages, my way of life under constant assault by the Islamic states on almost all sides. Though things are starting to look that way once more. The idea that moral imperatives should only apply to believers is a fairly Islamic idea on the whole really. So it's definitely something I am uncomfortable with, especially when being escribed to Christianity. That's not to say I vilify the Crusades, or think them unchristian, just the contrary, for to suffer such evil and indignity as the Islamic states visited upon Christendom is not righteousness in the least. I just feel the motives and mindset that you speak of to be rather alien and a bit too close to Islamic ideology for my tastes. I would differ to you on the historical efficacy of this however, as while I may feel or even wholeheartedly believe with every bit of reason and logic that I possess that those where the ideas of which Jesus was preaching, as you said their where many different factors outside of biblical teaching coloring the way mideival people viewed those idea's an teachings.

You made some very good points here.

What a concise analysis of Just War Theory Steven!! Dominus Vobiscum!

J. Stephen, after being a fan of yours for such a long time and finally hearing this video it was so hilarious to see you call that author "butthurt" 😂 I love how you bring up when authors put 20th or 21st century ideals into play when looking at medieval events and how you break down why it is nonsensical and mostly the opposite of what was viewed by Christendom at the time of the Crusades. Excellent video as always.

@RealCrusadesHistory

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, a little humor never hurts! Thanks brother, appreciate the interest and the endorsement!

To quote historian and scholar Kenneth W Harl “Christendom had to adopt the Roman tradition of conquest because unlike Islam religious violence or the concept of Jihad was not a foundation or apart of early Christian ideology.” Honestly if you have the chance look up his lectures on the Crusades they are the best, most in depth and unbiased approaches I have ever seen.

@servus_incognitus

6 ай бұрын

Wrong

18:00 Excellent, you brought up Augustine as the great advocate for use of "holy force" or use of force to convert pagans to Christianity. Both Martin Luther and Jean Cauvin were fans of Augustine, especially Cauvin, and used his teachings to reinforce some of their ideas or actions. Cauvin has an especially vicious record in dealing with "heretics" in Geneva. As I understand Luther, he became less enamored with Augustine the older he got, although he still had flashes of "holy force" in his mindset. Cauvin is best known in the English speaking world as John Calvin.

@jocelyn3721

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, the Calvinists I know really are enamored with Augustine. I was raised Lutheran and went to Lutheran Seminary but find him ok but sometimes I think he is awful.

I like the political ideas you portray and enjoy these videos

@TyranyFighterPatriot

6 жыл бұрын

Lecter Ulyanov Hear hear!!

Good stuff, thank you!

Great video thanks.

This is amazing thankyou so much!

@RealCrusadesHistory

2 жыл бұрын

You're welcome!

Dude - i love u (platonically) and listen to u daily (no lie). By the time i'm old i will hopefully know half of what u know!

An informative lecture.

great video

It's turn the other cheek in defience not submission.

@jocelyn3721

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, basically its psychological warfare.

I love your videos so greatful I found them. Warriors for Christ Rock.

JESUS SAID TURN THE OTHER CHEAK. THAT WAS MEANT IN A SPIRITUAL SENCE .DOESNT MEAN TURN YOUR HEAD SO THEY CAN HIT YOU AGAIN. FORGIVE THEM BUT BE MORE CAREFULL AND DEFEND YOUR SELF THE NEXT TIME.

Great video essay! I've been binging your stuff. I'm a protestant looking at the crusades through a sober but historical lens, and I have a response for your question at 13:18. Modern Christians (protestants, that is; I cannot speak for the Catholic brothers), I think, take issue with the Crusades because they are often portrayed today as an effort to expand Christ's kingdom on earth by the sword, or expand the territory of Christendom with the sword, and Christ told us that we are not to spread the good news with the edge of the sword. I am not necessarily saying that this is my understanding of the crusades, but that is why many protestants today take issue with them. Blessings!

@iservHim

Жыл бұрын

Another thing I would say is that protestants would say that Jesus taught that his kingdom is not of this world and that there wouldn't be a "Christian Empire" on earth, thus rendering the idea of the "Christian Army" somewhat of a strange concept. Again, I will not say whether or not I have come to any personal conclusions on this, but that is a serious protestant concern.

@RealCrusadesHistory

Жыл бұрын

Appreciate the comment! There's definitely a lot of room for interesting discussion surrounding this topic. A lot of it has to do with the varying interpretations of Christianity over the centuries. Thanks for checking out the videos!

@iservHim

Жыл бұрын

@@RealCrusadesHistory checking out the videos is my pleasure, and thanks for the response! I agree, there is room for a ton of discussion, and on top of that, historical context of course matters. Regardless, I thoroughly enjoy learning about the crusaders and regardless of their connotations, I think the image of a knight wearing a cross and fighting for Christ is an awesome and inspiring image. Blessings!

Thank You Very Much. ❤.

@RealCrusadesHistory

6 ай бұрын

You're welcome.

Lord comes from "loaf warden". Food was sometimes scarce esp. in Winter. Therefore, the person who protected the tribe's supplies was one of or the highest ranking member of the tribe.

Did you read the Quran? What are the differences in justifications of war between Muslims and Christians.

Stephen, wasn't there a push for church sanction of "holy war" during the reign of Nikephoras Phokas that was rejected?

Concerning the beginning: The Bible in the letters of Paul also says that God appointed the authorithies with a sword to exerce vengeance; so your interpretation of the beginning is right.

I think the holy wars fought in the old testament were different from the crusades in that the the Israelites were commanded directly by God through his prophets whereas the crusaders relied on their consciences formed by the teachings of the Church. Also, Augustine explicitly stated that wars of conversion were not just because they only managed conversions by fear of worldly powers rather than heavenly ones. I still believe the crusades in the east focused on pilgrimage and alleviating the suffering of fellow Christians were justified, but Charlemagne's forced conversions and that of the Northern crusades is questionable to me at best.

@dosran5786

5 жыл бұрын

the holy wars of the old testament werent always defensive wars either jacobs claiming of the holy land was an aggressive genocidal campaign.

@istvansipos9940

5 жыл бұрын

you mean, in the story they were commanded by god. right? if you think they indeed were commended by god in real life, you have a problem with that god component. With history, too (f.e. the exodus lacks any evidence) but the god-flaw would be the main flaw in this

Sanctioned war in the Roman world did involve the augaries and required a sign from the Gods that fortune was on the side of the war mission. So although this is very different from Medieval crusades spiritual war, the Roman war mission was not purely legalistic.

Discussing the roots of sacred warfare, you bring up Aristotle. My understanding is only two of his works, Categories and On Interpretation, were part of pre-Crusades European intellectual culture, as these were the only 2 surviving Latin translations. I don't think either of them are the sources of your points on Aristotle, though I may be wrong. Sorry for the nitpick!

@RealCrusadesHistory

4 жыл бұрын

Augustine had a major impact on western thinking, and Aristotle certainly played a role in influencing him. Augustine's views on the state and just war were at play in western thinking for many generations. Regardless of what texts were available during the Early Middle Ages, there's no question that Aristotle's influence loomed large in western thinking.

@toddcampbell-crow8615

3 жыл бұрын

Why? Christianity was never supposed to eliminate the importance of anything human before it's occurrence. You do know that cultures converted to Christianity and retained their cultural identity, right? That the Greeks were still Greek, and so forth?

ah Samson...

Fascinating . I’m curious about your sources.

What about the Northern Crusades ?

@baltichammer6162

6 жыл бұрын

He's got a separate video on the Northern Crusade if that's what you're asking. I never heard of it until 2 years ago while researching my family history. Frankly, there was constant warfare in northern Europe post-Viking age. War for all kinds of reasons and sometimes I could not find a reason. The Roman church didn't help matters by popes and bishops having their own armies. Not true Christianity per Jesus Christ.

Did the Church consider the French Wars of Religion sacred wars? Or, for that matter, were any wars Catholics made against protestants considered sacred? Edit: I do believe they were sacred, or at least had the potential to be

@TyranyFighterPatriot

10 ай бұрын

The Carlist Qars were because they were Doctrinally Pure unlike most of the mid century Catholic Wars.

Did Jesus beat up his enemies in the temple.

dont get me wrong i lament 1204 but the Byzantines totally brought it upon themselves they had long ago stopped trying to save themselves and just became decadent someone had to knife them eventually im just glad it was the west and venice

👍

The pope called upon those who supported the normans at the battle of hastings to fight for them. Did the turks fight?

Sources plz.

👍😄

What about the Hundred Years War where Christians fought each other for over one hundred years? I seems to me God was so fed up with this war he used Joan of Arc to put an end to it.

@williamcrawford7621

6 жыл бұрын

john Chesterfield To be fair, I don't the hundreds year war was never considered a holy war and it's arguable that it was even a just one.

@z9chemao

6 жыл бұрын

It was not a holy or just war, that is why God was fed up!

@williamcrawford7621

6 жыл бұрын

john Chesterfield Ah, I see what you were saying now. And sorry for all the typos in my last comment. I was a little hasty.

@istvansipos9940

5 жыл бұрын

yes, it was god. or a speaking unicorn. with enough evidence, both would be vital options for every historian. prove one first. or just think about it: god uses a peasant girl to end the war, then he makes / lets some mortals burn her alive. how caring! before that, he let all those boy-men die in all those battles and diseases. although, he must have known that the war would be unjust and that it would go on and on and ooon. he must have known that long before creating Adam! how is that logical from an all-knowing entity

Modern secular historians would say that the Christian Church simply had to come to terms with the need for at least defensive warfare once it became the favoured religion of the Roman Empire. But most would likely also say that that represented a necessary *repudiation* of Jesus' injunctions to non-violence.

What about the Hundred Years War where Christians fought each other for over one hundred years? I seems to me God was so fed up with this war he used Joan of Arc to put an end to it.

@baltichammer6162

6 жыл бұрын

You just cited one example of how off the rails the Vatican became over time. That idea of attacking or using violent force to "convert" unbelievers (heretics) is traced right back to Augustine of Hippo AKA St. Augustine. He advocated violence because God/Jesus used violence to throw Apostle Paul off his horse on the road to Damascus. A warped interpretation for sure. BTW Augustine is considered a founder/early church father of the Roman Catholic Church.

@jamestown8398

6 жыл бұрын

I've heard that Joan of Arc was sent to punish the English for their atrocities.

@z9chemao

6 жыл бұрын

I disagree!