God-Tier
- Scholagladiatoria
- Lindybeige
High-tier
- THFE(?) Productions - mostly gaming, but a few good historical stuff. Games surprisingly good for visuals.
Low tier
- Skallagrim - decent stuff, but a little too concerned with muh shaming. Seems like a good chap overall though.
Shit tier:
- John Green
Make additions pls
>>400042
What's so bad about John Meme?
>>400058
Mostly put him there as a meme, desu; realistically, he should go on low tier.
>viewing non-recent history through the lens of modern morality
The school of Life is pretty good in my opinion, but it's more about history of philosophy and political thought
>>400068
Isn't Green essentially just a figure head since the show is written by someone else?
>>400089
Yeah, but if you've seen his non-Crash Course stuff, it is pretty clear that he injects a lot of himself into it. I am led to believe that he at least approves of it.
>>400042
>john green
>shit tier
youre sounding kinda racist there buddy. what, you dont want to admit that the third world became the third world when white people messed it up?
A channel I sorta liie is The Great War
>>400104
>using Third World to refer to anything other than the non-aligned movement
>>400042
Lindybeige just fights with foam swords and gives his opinions of how to best fight with foam swords as if that means that's how people who fought with real swords fought.
>>400109
I've seen it on my suggestions quite a bit, but have never actually gotten around to watching it.
>>400120
Its worth a check out. The host is eh hut bare able.
>>400119
This desu
>>400113
sorry. i was being a silly. what is the non-aligned movement?
>>400131
Jesus christ auto correct.
>>400119
If you ignore his videos on
>archaeology
>logistics of pre-modern life
>construction
>how people lived in the ancient and medieval world
Seriously, you could only get that impression if you never watched his vids on stuff like rope making, torches, wearing armor, agriculture, forging, etc.
>>400133
The movement of countries that didn't take a side in the Cold War. It became known as the Third World, because the two sides in the Cold War were the First and Second Worlds, respectively.
>>400149
>learning shit 5 minutes into /his/
why didnt i come sooner?
so how did the term get hijacked into "countries that are poor and shitty"?
>>400166
By being poor and shitty
>>400166
Because the countries that were part of it were mostly irrelevant and poor. China, India, Yugoslavia, and later Albania were major players in it. It was largely made up of socialist states that were disillusioned with the USSR, and thus didn't get its economic aid, though, there were lots of others. It is still technically around, but it is a sham. Included much of Africa and South America as well.
>>400175
so its just happenstance or the economic and social struggles they had because they didnt ally with either of the major players at the time...or are they just shit?
>>400042
RealCrusadesHistory is at least high tier, he is of singular focus and has some bias but is very well read.
"The Great War" is great.
If you understand French, there's "Confessions d'Histoire" and "Nota Bene"
>>400188
They were mostly countries that were well-behind the developed countries. The reasons for this are various, but refusing the take a side in the Cold War did hamper their development because neither side was going to help them if they weren't getting anything out of it.
That is not to say they were all shit. Finland*, Albania & Yugoslavia were actually pretty nice by 1980. However, famine, poverty, and illiteracy were very widespread, as opposed to the First (Capitalist) and Second (Socialist) World which was mostly developed.
*Not officially a member, but was non-aligned.
>>400192
>RealCrusadesHistory
>perpetuating the idea that the crusades were defensive wars
Absolute shit tier mate
>>400201
thank you for the lesson.
>>400252
>them muslims was good boys
>they dindu nuffin
>them racis christians shootin our boys
fuck off dude.
>>400252
They were definitely at least counteroffensive. Defensive is debateable, but it is undebateable that the Seljuks were seizing massive amounts of Christian lands on top of the even more massive amounts seized by the Arabs. You have to remember that they were basically on the doorstep of the largest Christian city in the world.
>>400252
>implying they weren't
>>400267
Can you imagine the shit that could've happened if the Seljuks decided to convert to Christianity instead?
>>400262
Nice projecting there, the idea that the first crusade was a "reaction" to the islamic conquest is unsupported mainly due the huge time gap furthermore was the crusade not about ideals but simply about capturing the holy land
>>400277
Probably get kucked by revolts
>>400058
his attempts to be funny
>>400284
>need to unite europe
>need to make soldiers fearless
>deus vult
calm down abdullah.
also,
>projecting
kek
>>400267
Although the seljuk invasion did trigger the first crusade due the byzantine requesting help from the pope, idea that crusade came to be because they were "christian" lands is wrong (muslims and other non orthodox christians were all over the place), no, the middle ages weren't that idealistic, it was simply because these lands were byzantine.
>>400290
the reason i hate him, besides the obvious bs he mixes in, is the little weird voices and inflections he does at the end of sentences.
>>400298
>brings in recent events irrelevant to this discussion
>I am the one who projects
Sure buddy
>>400307
>recent events
>the crusades
nigger what? oh youre referring to the "good boy" thing? im sorry i use modern mentality to show your modern mentality on an issue. i didnt bring up another issue.
>>400284
>huge time gap
go back to bed Greene
>>400201
Finland was "Finlandized" ie under strong influence of Soviets and Yugoslavia was getting some finantial help or loans from the West.
>>400326
>islamic conquest ended early 9th century
>1st crusade started late 11th century
That's quite the gap there, mate
>>400321
>i use modern mentality
Which you got from recent history implying directly that you view what I said in the lights of recent events i.e. refugee crisis/paris/generally everything related to muslims
>show your modern mentality
And what is MY mentality about the crusades besides your projection of /pol/ tier memes?
>>400284
Huge time gap? You mean what, like, 4 years?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Seljuq_wars#Turkic_Conquests:_1071.E2.80.931096
The First Crusade was called only 4 years after the Turks besieged Constantinople.
>>400366
that the crusades were unwarranted.
the use of the good boy thing wasnt even in reference to paris or refugees. it was in reference to the shooting of unarmed "teens" and how the family always says "they was a good boy" and they "dindu nuffin".
>pol tier memes
>implying that its any less true
fuck off abdullah. dont you have some 9 year olds to rape?
>>400375
>turks attack constantinople
>invade arab lands
>"ITS TOTALLY JUSTIFIED BEUS BULD :DDD"
More /k/ than /his/ but Forgotten Weapons is the best youtube history channel around.
>>400284
>huge time gap
There were raids on Rome a little more than a hundred years before. Spain and Sicily were occupied. Do you really think that for your average peasant in Southern Europe Muslims were not an every day worry ?
I remember watching a documentary where a Muslim historian claimed that the Muslim world was still "deeply traumatised" by the crusades. How do think Christians felt after the violent conquest of half of Christiendom, and the loss of it's holiest cities ?
>>400375
The context I'm using "islamic conquest" in is the attempts to conquer western europe such as the invasion of southern france and italy as well as the conquest of southern spain which ended in the 9th century, the seljuk invasion of anatolia is a whole different matter mainly since western europe didn't give a fuck about that
>>400382
>more /pol/ meme
So do you actually have anything to support your view besides some pro-sentiment towards some fuckwads on another board?
>>400400
Try 200 years, those arabs didn't even plunder the city itself
>How do think Christians felt after the violent conquest of half of Christiendom, and the loss of it's holiest cities
Pretty much unaffected actually
>>400390
Arab lands that had been conquered by the Seljuk Turks, you kek
>>400406
Western Europe evidently did give a fuck about the invasion of Anatolia, since that is why they called the Council of Clermont, at the behest of Roman Emperor Alexius I Comnenus.
>>400410
I'm talking in general here, the pope only decided to give support the byzantine after they requested, the only ones involved in the 1st crusade were relatively irrelevant noblemen, kings and important nobles were not involved.
Besides that the population only focused on the crusade itself, the greater context i.e. the seljuk invasion didn't matter to them
