The 1- 4 Crusades are a lot like the Indiana Jones franchise. The first is a classic, the second is largely overshadowed save for a few iconic moments, the third isn't as iconic as the first but is remembered very voraciously by a lot of people and has gone on to have perhaps the greatest lasting memory, and then there's a fourth one nobody likes talking about - coincidentally, both feature Shia LaBeouf.
3rd one was the most well known, and the most bombastic one. First one was TOO LOW BUDGET! in most of the adventure, they walked though hills, steppes and deserts. There are some many memorable moments, the dark humour is great. But! Most of it is just time filler, and most of war scenes are just them getting hunted down by seljuk militia. (Not even main army, especially on to mid 35 minutes of the movie) Third one is full of epic battles, large action scenes, heroes on both side, antiheroes, villains, traitors. Love hate betrayal intrigue... Most of the characters on first crusade are two dimentional characters, and/or comic relief characters, Weirdos etc. I think it's your nostalgia speaking
The Fourth Crusade basically ended before they departed from Venice. Everything that happened after they departed from Venice was essentially a series of secular, geopolitical conflicts on behalf of Venetian interests. Can't really call it a crusade if the Pope doesn't support it and it's not religiously motivated. Same reason we don't call the war between England and France a crusade. It's not religious.
Dude the Pope owned slaves. Participated in genocides, calling them missionary work. Let's not start with the indulgences. Everything was done for power.
Then why would the Pope establish an expansive papal legate in the Latin Empire of Constantinople? Because Venetian interests merged with Catholic interests, and therefore with Papal interests. That's why after centuries of Latin aggresion the saying "I would rather see the Muslim turban in the midst of the city than the Latin mitre" became popular among the Greek Romans.
@@Daniel-hp3tk Probably because the damage was already done? What were they supposed to do? The Latin Empire was going to be formed either way. Also that saying goes for the west as well. And historically the Byzantines were arrogant assholes who always feigned ignorance whenever a latin needed help. A massive conflict was inevitable.
i dont know, i think it takes a special kind of admiral to be brave enough to sell the nails holding his ships together. probably just needed some quick cash to buy nails or something
The West is lucky to have had the Greek/Roman Empire in the East as it served as a buffer zone against the Islamic Turkish Ottoman conquest of Europe. The Ottomans would most likely have reached deep into Europe if it weren't for the Greek Byzantines. Less than 200 years after the fall of Constantinople, they were at the gates of Venice a powerful Empire at that time, but Ottomans almost conquered them. The Poles came and saved them. Unfortunately, the Greeks and many other Eastern Europeans became second class citizens in their own country.
Also Bulgarians, Serbs, Croats and don't forget Romanian fighters - they slowed down the Ottomans buying time for Central and Western Europe. The Balkan states protected the European culture in a sense
How? By the time Constantinople capitulated to the ottomans. The Byzantine empire held on to the Constantinople and the area around it for a very long time and the ottomans were deep in east Europe!
If one breaks down byzantine behavior in the 25 years leading up to the 4th crusade its really hard to see how the 4th crusade WOULDNT go the way it did. Still a disaster but far more understandable.
The term "Byzantine" may be acceptable at the present time since that is how most people today refer to what had historically been called the Eastern Roman Empire. Citizens of what was left of that empire actually still referred to themselves as "Romans" . In any event the term "Byzantium" however has no application to the 15th century since it had long since ceased to exist. It was the city that Constantinople was built upon in the 4th century..
In Rhodes leader becomes Leon Gavalas, not venetians, but surounded by other ,,latins,, (in Koos [genoese Vignoli], Attaleia [Antalia] a pisan condotier [Aldobrandini], Meghiste & later hospitaliers in Halikarnassos)
The fault is as much the Byzantines' as it is the crusaders. Decades of political intrigue and one-upmanship - families doing what is best for themselves rather than what was best for the state!
The 1- 4 Crusades are a lot like the Indiana Jones franchise. The first is a classic, the second is largely overshadowed save for a few iconic moments, the third isn't as iconic as the first but is remembered very voraciously by a lot of people and has gone on to have perhaps the greatest lasting memory, and then there's a fourth one nobody likes talking about - coincidentally, both feature Shia LaBeouf.
Fuzzy Dunlop dude how do u not like the 3rd 1st? last crusade is best crusade
And all the others are just the weird spin offs
3rd one was the most well known, and the most bombastic one.
First one was TOO LOW BUDGET! in most of the adventure, they walked though hills, steppes and deserts.
There are some many memorable moments, the dark humour is great. But!
Most of it is just time filler, and most of war scenes are just them getting hunted down by seljuk militia. (Not even main army, especially on to mid 35 minutes of the movie)
Third one is full of epic battles, large action scenes, heroes on both side, antiheroes, villains, traitors. Love hate betrayal intrigue... Most of the characters on first crusade are two dimentional characters, and/or comic relief characters, Weirdos etc.
I think it's your nostalgia speaking
How do you not have no views and subs? Keep it up any how mate, I love your content.
Venice: "I am altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any further"
Constantinople: "this deal is getting worse all the time"
The mention to Grand Nagus... Priceless 😘 you're a laugh, mate! 💪
1204 hurts more than 1071 or 1453. It really is the worst.
When you beat the DLC but not the main quest
this is a very nice video, it helped me a lot on a research paper I had to write on the fourth crusade
As a fan of DS9 series, the mention about the similarity between capitalistic Venice and Ferengi is quite funny.
The Fourth Crusade basically ended before they departed from Venice. Everything that happened after they departed from Venice was essentially a series of secular, geopolitical conflicts on behalf of Venetian interests.
Can't really call it a crusade if the Pope doesn't support it and it's not religiously motivated. Same reason we don't call the war between England and France a crusade. It's not religious.
And If you attack people in the name of religion that makes it right?
Dude the Pope owned slaves. Participated in genocides, calling them missionary work. Let's not start with the indulgences. Everything was done for power.
we dont call the norman conquest a crusade while it had papal support, including papal banners and the forgiving of sin afterwards
Then why would the Pope establish an expansive papal legate in the Latin Empire of Constantinople? Because Venetian interests merged with Catholic interests, and therefore with Papal interests. That's why after centuries of Latin aggresion the saying "I would rather see the Muslim turban in the midst of the city than the Latin mitre" became popular among the Greek Romans.
@@Daniel-hp3tk Probably because the damage was already done? What were they supposed to do? The Latin Empire was going to be formed either way.
Also that saying goes for the west as well. And historically the Byzantines were arrogant assholes who always feigned ignorance whenever a latin needed help. A massive conflict was inevitable.
My favorite crusade!!!!! It's so insane I can't believe the course of events from 4th Crusade to the Eastern Roman Empire being a thing again.
Why would this be your favourite? It’s the biggest tragedy
i dont know, i think it takes a special kind of admiral to be brave enough to sell the nails holding his ships together. probably just needed some quick cash to buy nails or something
Stonks
The West is lucky to have had the Greek/Roman Empire in the East as it served as a buffer zone against the Islamic Turkish Ottoman conquest of Europe. The Ottomans would most likely have reached deep into Europe if it weren't for the Greek Byzantines. Less than 200 years after the fall of Constantinople, they were at the gates of Venice a powerful Empire at that time, but Ottomans almost conquered them. The Poles came and saved them. Unfortunately, the Greeks and many other Eastern Europeans became second class citizens in their own country.
Don't you mean Vienna?
@@stevensammons4062 Yes, it's Vienna. Thanks for correcting me.
Also Bulgarians, Serbs, Croats and don't forget Romanian fighters - they slowed down the Ottomans buying time for Central and Western Europe.
The Balkan states protected the European culture in a sense
How? By the time Constantinople capitulated to the ottomans. The Byzantine empire held on to the Constantinople and the area around it for a very long time and the ottomans were deep in east Europe!
Also you can tell from the picture that Dick Cheney has absolutely no clue where his heart is - because he doesn't have one.
Tersites, what is that word you used at 28:43 "one power which was clearly ????? by it?"
Ruin?
You should of put the picture of gran Naguis. :)
If one breaks down byzantine behavior in the 25 years leading up to the 4th crusade its really hard to see how the 4th crusade WOULDNT go the way it did. Still a disaster but far more understandable.
I mean if they’d just gotten ships from someone else or had enough people show up to the crusade it could of been different
Wasn't the crusaders excommunicated when they attacked Zara?
Yes but the leaders hid that.
That's not Dandolo. That is Gritti.
The term "Byzantine" may be acceptable at the present time since that is how most people today refer to what had historically been called the Eastern Roman Empire. Citizens of what was left of that empire actually still referred to themselves as "Romans" . In any event the term "Byzantium" however has no application to the 15th century since it had long since ceased to exist. It was the city that Constantinople was built upon in the 4th century..
In Rhodes leader becomes Leon Gavalas, not venetians, but surounded by other ,,latins,,
(in Koos [genoese Vignoli], Attaleia [Antalia] a pisan condotier [Aldobrandini], Meghiste & later hospitaliers in Halikarnassos)
Richard should have taken Jerusalem. It was there for the taking. He seems to have had some kind of tantrum or something.
Venice is sinking 😏😏😏💧🏊🏊 I couldn't be happy more how thats feel Venice 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 hope u like swimming
What goes around comes around.
The crusaders did the world a favor.
By killing fellow Christians and getting their flat ass kicked by Islam?
@@yuracracker5572 By taking all the gold and treasure that holy land on Islamic lands and the biggest traitors of catholicism offered.
Grand Nagus :D
Deus NOT vult.
Actually it's "Partition of the Empire of the Romans"
The fault is as much the Byzantines' as it is the crusaders. Decades of political intrigue and one-upmanship - families doing what is best for themselves rather than what was best for the state!