Видео

That sounds like a comment intended for my other short about Capetian succession.

I hope so, I just hope I could find the motivation to keep going.

The Romans had to choose between their slaves who were mainly northern barbarians to have😏🤤🍆🥵 . .

Thank you for your patience, currently working a video about Petronious Maximus, but after that I should return to Burgundy.

Yep, some things are bizarre.

I believe the concept of legitimate offspring, which appears to take root in the 9th or 10th century, was an attempt at stopping the fragmentation of kingdoms that resulted from Germanic inheritance customs. A fragmentation that always led to wars between siblings or half-siblings. We can observe a Carolingian "habit" of making first illegitimate sons and later 2nd or later sons a Bishop or some high ranking clerical figure. This appears to be itself at the root of the idea of marriage as recognised and made holy by the church. The intent was to limit and hierarchise descendance so government would be more a function to fulfil over stable areas and less a private property to quarrel about.

Thanks, I have been slacking off these past two months, but I should get back into it.

@@DrearySagas dont worry ... excelency aint inmediate

I don't believe in bot promotion.

There is a Finnish word, "jalkavaimo" that translates to "Foot wife" and means concubine?

@@Tia-Marie Yep, while the concept I talked about definitely existed, I took the liberty to use the literal word "footwife" to make it a bit easier to distinguish between it and "concubina". I guess I could have also used the German word "nebenfrau", meaning "side-wife". I considered clarifying it but felt it would have hurt the pacing of the video.

you nerds can barely get an actual wife, come back to reality and humble yourself lol

I'd love to know more about the subject in medieval times. I remember reading a statement somewhere that the concept was linked to Carolingian struggles in the 9th century but never looked much further.

@@Leo_ofRedKeep It really is facinating subject matter, and I hope to return to it sooner rather than later.

I have a very thick Finnish accent, so I feel like it would be harder to understand and distracting. Dunno, if I ever get monetized, I might consider hiring someone to do VO, which is what many channels do. Battle Buzz was initially voiced by the guy himself, and he had this strange accent ( I still remember his pronunciation of the word "king" being bizarre), but once he got bigger he hired a British guy to narrate.

I guess I might have overcompensated. History tube is very competitive, and most channel use still-images, so I wanted to move as far from it as possible.

Good points, thank you. 1. Yep, might have overcompensated. Less might be more. 2. Yeah, battles are kinda, eh. Still figuring out, how I could make them cooler in a 3D environment. I thought shrinking and flying on impact, would work better, but it might not be as interesting as I thought. I kinda do want to do something with them. I have considered replacing NATO symbols, with just soldier cards, having them getting sliced and pierced on battle battlefields, but I don't know if that would be too abstract. 3. True, though it is kinda hard to include much detail to keep the narrative flowing. 4. Don't think so. 5. 6th-century England is extremely messy, so I don't think I will cover it with this series. But I have considered making a series interpreting Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.

@@DrearySagas Keep in mind you don't have to go into "Medieval II Total War" level detail on each battle. In fact, I think it would distract from your overall narrative. Much of military history is just descriptive, especially battle narratives. I would suggest focusing on the strategic situations, maybe stopping to show something really cool or weird that happened in a particular battle, but otherwise just who won and lost, effects, etc...

@@TheLoyalOfficer Well, I cartainly won't be using any footage from Total Wars.

@@DrearySagas Yes, but I meant in that style though, if you will. That level of detail.

I'm sorry that you feel that way, I worked hard on this, so I feel the need to at least explain creative decisions. Visuals are indeed abstract, but I think it's a stretch to say they have nothing to do with narration. They are supposed to be visual aids to strengthen the narrative and create certain imagery. Granted I might have gone too far in places. When it comes to portraits, I realize disdain for AI-generated images, but what would you have me do? None of the historical characters in this have portraits or statues, somehow have coin inscriptions (which were used as inspiration for the portraits). Hence any depiction of them is automatically a "fantasy portrait". Therefore, even if I drew them myself they would still be "fantasy portraits". Your mileage may vary, but I think these portraits are at least decent-looking, and allow viewers to easily distinguish between many different characters. About narration being questionable, sure. I realize I could have worded many sentences much better and clearer, but I also think I could have done worse. By the off chance you actually read all this... Thank you for the comment and have a good day!

For now, there are some Shorts I made with a similar style.

The "gh" is pronounced like the "g" in great

@@trazyianajones456 Oooh I see, so originally the name means straight up "Great" So he is literally named "Great" Wow. In Spanish it's "Hugo" so it also sounds common here.

@@makutas-v261 i believe they both originate from the same germanic root. Also, i'm not sure if i expressed myself clearly (i'm not english), i didn't mean to say that the name Hugues meant great, i meant to say that the last syllable was pronounced like the g in the word great. Pardon me if you understood that already and if i wrote all of this for nothing.

Thank you. I like to think this style is something unique, but then again, the views indicate there might not be audience for it.

Keep grinding dude, people need to find your channel first - let the yt algorithm do its thing @@DrearySagas

Thank you for the feedback, I will take that into consideration.

Thank you. The animation is still experimental, but I hope it makes the Channel stand out and bring production/entertainment value. Depending on how poorly this video performs, it might not be worth doing, considering it was quite time-consuming (for a 5-minute video), and many history videos just use still images and still perform better than this.

@DrearySagas I feel you. If most of your time went in the animation, maybe I'd think of less time consuming ways to stand out. I wish we lived in a world where the quality of your content rather than the eye-candy/veneer makes you stand out. Before I'll forget (because usually I do), let me give this a like to help the algorithm. I really want to see this series made. Oh, and something to really up your quality and increase the usefulness of these videos (though sadly it will do little to the algorithm I'm afraid): please consider listing all historical/scientific sources and references you use.

@@JuanHans Sources here being History of the Franks by Gregory of Tours and Bachrach's Merovingian Military Organization, 481-751.

​@@DrearySagasThank you for the sources! I'd put them in the description box for everyone to see.

Mission accomplished

It is amazing

I really enjoyed the simplicity of the graphics. Very refreshing. Great job.

Thank, you. There is a tease for what is coming next. Some two weeks of work have amounted to 3 minutes of work, and I hope to extend it to 5 minutes.