The Crusades - Pilgrimage or Holy War?: Crash Course World History #15

In which John Green teaches you about the Crusades embarked upon by European Christians in the 12th and 13th centuries. Our traditional perception of the Crusades as European Colonization thinly veiled in religion isn't quite right. John covers the First through the Fourth Crusades, telling you which were successful, which were well-intentioned yet ultimately destructive, and which were just plain crazy. Before you ask, no, he doesn't cover the Children's Crusade, in which children were provoked to gather for a Crusade, and then promptly sold into slavery by the organizers of said Crusade. While this story is charming, it turns out to be complete and utter hooey.


Follow us!
@thecrashcourse
@realjohngreen
@raoulmeyer
@crashcoursestan
@saysdanica
@thoughtbubbler


Like us! 
‪http://www.facebook.com/youtubecrashc...
Follow us again! 
‪http://thecrashcourse.tumblr.com

• Category

  Education

[kathanliz]

There's no holy hand grenade??!?!

[IntroSpectre6x3]

I hope everything you love catches on fire.

[deltaproductions113]

go shove the skull in your pic up your arse and stop being a little two year old cunt whose been taught by fascist parents who raped you that Islam is bad true there is bad muslims theres good ones as well i am not a muslim myself but i hate seeing a people oppressed you are like the Nazis you are scum and if i had a gun and you were standing in front of me i would shoot your knee caps and mangina

[revolution4freedom1]

No, just not in denial of facts like most people who are a product of biased Western high school academia.

[joshua12345a]

only because they were more advanced then the europeans at the time.

[joshua12345a]

wouldn' that be suicide seeing as he only loves himself.

[joshua12345a]

yes they lacked in food 

[jamedalton]

it really seems like this guy leans more towards islam

[tajikKhojand]

Most Europeans unfortunately has a slightly biased version of history because of the way history is taught.

Example, Roman conquest in North Africa and Middle East is glorified. but, Arab invasion in Europe is seen as aggression. If a similar standard is applied to Roman Conquests then one would also consider the Roman occupation of Middle East as aggression, as they don't belong there.

Also, one needs to understand than things were different back then. It was normal to invade other lands.

[tajikKhojand]

I think he did cover at the beginning that if the Crusade was a response to Muslim expansion, then it would have started in 7th century, not some 400 years later, but early Christians were perfectly fine with Arabs.

Yes, the Arab Empires & Byzantines fought, but at other times they also exchanged gifts and had peace. It wasn't until the Seljuk Turks arrived that things became different.

[SerbUkraine]

He did not cover. The Crusade began because of Islamic exspansion into Europe. For West Europeans, it was a necessary response to long invasions of Spain, Italy, and parts of France. East Europe (mainly Greece) had no major involvement, however: When Greek imperial lands were being threatened in the Black Sea, the Emperor sent a letter to Pope requesting SOME mercenaries. The Pope found this to be an excuse to invade the Middle East. The Muslims caused the war, the Catholics just began it.

[MrSqaz2wsx]

So because the Christians could not make their pilgrimage and because they turks sacked the holy city that caused the first crusade. Correct me if im wrong but that is religion starting wars.