Comments by "Samson Soturian" (@samsonsoturian6013) on "Christian Conquest: The (Staggering) Siege of Jerusalem 1099 (First Crusade)" video.

  1. The most important thing to remember about the Crusades is no one was in charge. The only time an entire Crusader army had a single commander, he was excommunicated. In the first and largest Crusade there were three major commanders controlling only a marginal preponderance of forces. Many of them were gangs of amateurs under the command of their local barrons and princes.
    297
  2. Wanted land? Not really, the first crusade started with a secular war between the Byzantines and the Seljuks that the Byzantines lost. They called for help and the Pope saw an opportunity to bring the Orthodox under Catholic dominion. The Crusader army, however, quickly lost their original objective and decided to resolve an unrelated issue where Seljuks weren't allowing Christian pilgrims to visit Jerusalem
    13
  3.  @napolien1310  Some people said he should be that but no one cared to follow his orders personally. You must recall the Pope was also an Italian prince at the time.
    7
  4.  @xxx-lx6bu  depends on group and time analyzed. Some of these groups were mobs of pirates fighting for amnesty from crimes committed back home, but most of those guys didn't get past Turkey.
    6
  5. Holy War is never religious either
    5
  6.  @curranlakhani  more or less. Much of the army was indirectly loyal to the king, and there were volunteers from across Europe
    3
  7. We don't crusade anymore.
    3
  8. 11:00 No one called that area Palestine at the time.
    2
  9.  @johnnyboy3410  the Mohammedans changed all the names while the Crusaders either used Biblical names or city names. I.E. The Kingdom of Jerusalem.
    2
  10.  @johnnyboy3410  That’s what the Jihadis called themselves at the time. The Followers of Mohammed.
    2
  11.  @cachorrovinagre2979  there's not as much difference between amateurs and professionals as you think
    2
  12.  @AK-hi7mg  the difference between an amatuer and professional soldier is pay, not skill.
    2
  13.  @robert48044  No, I was speaking of religious unity, not secular unity. No one had specific plans to screw over the Byzantines. That didn't stop drama from ensuing, though You seem irrationally belligerent to men who are long dead.
    2
  14.  @stephengayton5246  Not exactly. With other Crusades there was a leader of a faction that was by far the largest. For instance, much of King Richard's army was indirectly loyal via barons who served on contract, with lots of French and other volunteers picked up along the way.
    1
  15.  @michaeldanmosley4169  not if you know anything
    1
  16.  @robert48044  Most Popes weren't into Crusader things. And the Pope never gave Jerusalem as an objective that I recall. The call up was to "defend the church."
    1
  17.  @robert48044  that's a Jewish thing
    1