Lepanto 1571: Shattering the Idea of Ottoman Invincibility
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 май 2024
- Thanks to Nord VPN for sponsoring this video. Check it out here: nordvpn.com/sandrhoman It's risk free with Nord's 30-day-money-back-guarantee!
The battle of Lepanto 1571 was one of the greatest naval battles of the Mediterranean and the last one to be fought almost exclusively by rowing vessels. According to maritime historian Lawrence Mott a staggering amount of 70 to 90 percent of all war galleys in the basin participated in the fighting. Lepanto was in some sense the naval counterpart of the 1683 siege of Vienna. Contemporaries and historians long saw it as a climactic battle between east and west and mythologized it as the battle in which a Christian fleet defeated the seemingly unstoppable Ottoman threat from the east. In this video were going to look at what exactly happened in the gulf of Patras and look critically at the impact the battle really had.
Patreon (thank you): / sandrhomanhistory
Prints & T-Shirts: sandrhoman.creator-spring.com/
Paypal (thank you: www.paypal.com/paypalme/SandR...
Twitter: / sandrhoman
#history #battle #educational
Chapters:
00:00-01:29 Intro
01:29-02:34 NORD
02:34-04:56 Chapter 1: Rising Tensions
04:56-08:57 Chapter 2: Dissent
08:57-13:17 Chapter 3: Mutual Underestimation
13:17-19:07 Chapter 4: "An infantry battle on floating platforms"
19:07-23:30 Chapter 5: Cheating Defeat
Source:
Agostón, G., Victory of the West: The Story of the Battle of Lepanto (review), www.researchgate.net/publicat... (23.12.22).
Capponi, N., Victory of the West. The Great Christian-Muslim Clash at the Battle of Lepanto, Cambridge 2006.
Finkel, C., Osman's Dream. The History of the Ottoman Empire-Basic Books, New York 2007, p. 157.
Parker, G., The Military Revolution. Military Innovation and the Rise of the West, 1500-1800, Cambridge 1996.
Glete, J., Warfare at Sea, 1500-1650. Maritime Conflicts and the Transformation of Europe, London 2000
Guilmartin, J. F., Gunpowder and Galleys: Changing Technology and Mediterranean Warfare at Sea in the Sixteenth Century, 2nd edn., London 2003.
Guilmartin, J. F. Galleons and Galleys, London 2002.
Mott, L. V., s.v. Battle of Lepanto, in: The Oxford Encyclopedia of Maritime History online (www.oxfordreference.com/displ....
Norwich, J. J., A History of Venice, London 1989, p. 518.
Setton, K. M., The Papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571, vol. 4 The Sixteenth Century from Julius III to Pius V, Philadelphia 1984.
Stevens, W., History of Sea Power, New York 1920
Sicking, L., Naval warfare in Europe, c. 1330-c. 1680, in: Tallet, Frank/Trim, D. J. B. (Ed.), European Warfare 1350-1750, Cambridge 2010, p. 242.
Thanks to Nord VPN for sponsoring this video. Check it out here: nordvpn.com/sandrhoman It's risk free with Nord's 30-day-money-back-guarantee!
Bro you are making it now? You should have made it earlier, I mean years ago.
Yeah, every time a government and quite often even huge corporations demand a VPN give them info on someone, the VPN drops to its knees and opens its mouth with an audible 'POP'. And if that doesn't work, money always does. You're not safe, and you never will be.
You made a nice video.
6:26 aha !from here came the name of the italian football club - Sampdoria Genova... from this name of Gianandrea DORIA! SampDORIA.... :)
I don’t get it how did the Europeans ended up believing in ottoman invincibility when ottoman invincibility was already destroyed in battles like the sieges of Vienna 1529 and the siege of Malta 1565 those battles showed the ottomans weren’t invincible so what ottoman invincibility did the Europeans believe in??
There's a reason why historians consider this battle to have a much more signficant strategic impact towards World History than the Battle of Vienna did: This Battle was the Ottomans' LAST chance to prove themselves a world naval power, breakout of the Mediterreanean and eventually become a blue water navy. This battle ensured that the Ottomans would forever be bottled up and restricted to their own brown waters by the superior Navies of Western Europe.
only the ottomans broke out of the med quite some time before Lepanto. they fought with the Portuguese at Diu 1538 . There were expeditions to Zanzibar in 1589. The only reason the Ottomans couldnt break out of the med was no Suez canal
@@shehryarashraf5840 Diu was before Lepanto, and the goal was to reinforce Gujarat's forces as the Portuguese sieged it. The fact that Portugal was able to siege Diu when Portugal proper was tens of thousands of kilometers away is telling in regards to just how superior their blue water navy actually was.
As for Zanzibar, the Ottomans may have been able to get a fleet down the African coast to assist whatever Sultanate against Portuguese forces (again), but the fact remains that their fleets were completely ineffective by then, which reinforces my point.
@@Wasserkaktus in the Siege of Diu, the Portugese were defending. The fact that the Ottomans were able to siege Diu for 4 months, so far away from Constantinople is telling how superior their Blue Water Navy actually was. Keep in mind, the Ottomans are at the same time fighting in the Med, and fighting on Land against the Habsburgs in Hungary, as well as the Iranians in the Zagros. they did not have enough resources to achieve hegemony in the Indian Ocean.
@@shehryarashraf5840 The Ottomans never had a blue water navy. That is my point. You apparently don't know what a blue water navy is, or how it differs from a brown water navy. Look up to see how those two are different. If the Ottomans had a blue water navy, they would have explored the New World or Pacific.
@@shehryarashraf5840 As for claiming how great the Ottomans were on fighting on two fronts, that was the NORM between great powers in the Exploration Age. The Portuguese fought in both India, Indonesia and Africa, while the Spanish fought in huge wars in Europe while also expanding in the New World.
It's kind of a crime not mentioning at all the figure of Alvaro de Bazan commanding the League's reserve, as he is not only considered by many the greatest admiral of its time (of all time, some claim), but also is said to have been the key figure for the victory in Lepanto by interveening in the critical moments of the battle and preventing a possible disaster, as he was the one responsible for sending in the reserve to counter both Sirocco´s flanking attempt and Uluj Ali´s pounce for the League´s open right flank, as well as reinforcing the Christian center when both rival flagships clashed and exploiting the opportunity when the ottoman flagship fell.
Also present in the battle were a 26 year old Alessandro Farnese (who features in your channel and was one of the greatest generals of the time) and a 24 year old Miguel de Cervantes, the author of Don Quixote, who lost an arm in the battle and was captured by the Ottomans in his way back, spending 5 years as a slave in Algiers during which he himself engineered a handful of scape attempts.
If the Brits had Nelson, Wellington and Shakespeare all together in any battle (let alone one of this massive scale and significance) you can bet your ass they would not waste any time mentioning them at every chance and making a thousand documentaries and movies about them. =)
As a bit of trivia, if you ever go to Barcelona, in the Naval Museum you can go on a real-size replica of the Real, the Christian flagship, and sprinkled around Spain you have other relics such as the huge banner of the Real (in Toledo, I believe) or the captured lanterns of the Ottoman's admiral.
Very true, very disappointed. Tends to happen when all of the sources they use diminish Spanish achievements
@William Ewart Gladstone sisoy
@@williamedwardgladstone2343I was thinking the sane thing.
Well said!
@William Ewart Gladstone Would you call it "crying" pointing out that not mentioning Ney or von Blucher is kind of a crime when explaining the Battle of Waterloo? Or not mentioning Davout when talking about Jena-Auerstedt?
Cervantes the writer of "El Quijote" fought in this battle and lost a hand. He was later impresioned in Africa and tried escape several times. He only got back to Spain when somebody paid for his liberation.
He didn' lose the hand. He didn't do the needed rehabilitation and lost the mobility of the arm.
@William Ewart Gladstone He was sick with fever. His officer ordered him to stay at bed, but he disobeyed him and fought until he got shot by an arquebus.
Good information.. Didn't know
In Spanish his nickname is "El manco de Lepanto", the one-armed from Lepanto, although he didn't lose his arm.
@William Ewart Gladstone sure, and you know that how exactly?
Forgot to mention that two of the large galleasses were commanded by Ambrosio and Antonio Bragadino, younger brothers of the previously tortured governor of Famagusta, Marcantonio Bragadino. You can just imagine their thirst for revenge. 20:25 But not without taking with him, the captured Maltese Cross ensign of the Capitana of the Order, still displayed to this day, in some North African museum.
Well it's time to retake it then.
@@giorgiociaravolol1998 have you tried asking for it?
@@giorgiociaravolol1998 Oh look, it seems like it's that time again.. #10th
European empires invaded majority of the world, colonized two entire continents, steal every kind of ensign, national treasure and millions of lives!! So i think you people shouldn't be this salty because a single eastern empire could defeat you in your own continent and treated Christians EXACTLY same as how you were treating others...
Bragadin, most Venetian names didn't end in a vowel
I read a conving argument in a book about sea power that the true loss for the Ottomans at Lepanto wasn't in ships, but in skilled mariners (many of whom were killed after the battle). This loss of institutional knowledge, and maritime culture, significiantly curtailed the ability of the Ottomans to conduct aggressive naval operations for many decades, during a time when European powers were placing a greater and greater focus on their navies. The Ottoman response was to rebuild a huge number of ships, they should have built naval colleges instead.
The Ottoman navy actually did recover after Lepanto, even capturing Tunis 3 years later, what actually caused the Ottoman navy to stagnate was ironically peace with all it's naval competitors, as for nearly 70 years the Ottomans found themselves at war with Austria and Persia, 2 land based powers without a navy, with no way to use the navy in these wars it here where the Ottoman navy actually declined until the war for Crete in 1645 when at long last, an enemy with a navy (Venice) and a campaign for a maritime goal once again presented itself.
Yep, this is about right.
You can also say the effects of this Battle also showed a key weakness of the Janissary Corps, probably because the Porte was unable to actually build ANY proper naval war college because the Janissaries had near total control of the Ottoman military apparatus, and any attempt to build a naval war college could have been seen as a threat to the Janissaries on their hold lf said apparatus.
Once Lepanto ended, the Janissaries decided their "big blue navy" experiment was over, and that they would focus almost exclusively on Army land operations instead.
@@Wasserkaktus I think what you said is true but later in the Ottoman history, likely in the XVIII century.
Even after Lepanto the Jannisaries were ok. The were not the main reason why Ottos lost there, but because guns and cannons.
Ottos were fascinated by cannons of huge caliber and never understood the importance of focusing on medium and small caliber ones and this is quite surprising since they were one of the first powers to use cannons for siege operations, like in the siege of Costantinople which was a turning point for their history. Infact Ottoman navy relied on speed and manuverability, in Lepanto ships mounted just one huge caliber cannon (bigger than european counterparts) usually on the prow but the crew was usually composed of bowmen and a company of Janniseries (equipped with state of art rifles, better than european ones). But this wasn't enough to match up european ships.
European embarked a much superior number of cannons of different calibers and mostly arquebusier. Infantry of ancient concept like pikemen were from Spain or Germany and were a minor part of the soldiers embarked. So when a Otto ship was boarded we must consider that the ship itself was badly damaged from hours of cannon fire, the crew was badly injured from the shrapnels and mosquets.
When boarded usually christian slaves on rows were usually liberated or menaged to free themselves and join the battle.
I agree in Lepanto ottos had a critical loss of skilled sailors (mostly greeks) crew and despite the fact they rebuiklt another navy it wasn't like the one they lost and they didn't made any other major naval project, but europeans ships, cannons and especially the manufacturing capacity to build cannons were much more advanced than turks.
In the small Spanish village of Enciso, there is an exact copy of a Spanish warship that participated in the Lepanto battle. It was given a a token of gratitude and respect for the heroic fighting of a Spanish sailor from that small village. The strange thing is, if you are alone in that beautiful medieval church, and observe the almost one meter long replica, floating 3 meter above ground level in the centre of the church, one can almost travel in time back into that fateful battle.
and the guy in the video didnt even mention the spanish at all.
@@Immigrantlovesamerica ''The fleet of the Christian alliance was manned by 12,920 sailors. In addition, it carried almost 28,000 fighting troops: 10,000 Spanish regular infantry of excellent quality, 7,000 German and 6000 Italian mercenary, and 5,000 Venetian soldiers of exceptional worth.'' Cervantes , author of Don Quichote, too, and was wounded, lost left hand..
@@Immigrantlovesamerica He's an Anglosaxon after all. Hispanophobia still runs deep in their veins.
@@Chunbot882 Very true , he also didn't mention the two soldiers who killed Muezzensade Ali , then cut his head off and put it on a pike were Spanish.
@@jphalsberghe1 why the differentiation between Italians and venetians?
The Great Siege of Malta in 1565 was the first major defeat the shattered the myth of ottoman invincibility. As Voltaire wrote, “there is nothing more renown than the Siege of Malta.malta was meant to fall in a short 3 week campaign and then to be used as a launching pad into southern Europe. Three months later the Ottomans withdrew in utter defeat.
Malta was saved by the spanish tercios commanded by don García de Toledo from sicily.
Not true, Malta held no strategic value to anyone (Even the Knights themselves in their own entries described how they hated the island, both the flat terrain/lack of natural defenses in mountains like back in Rhodes and the local population, a feeling that was mutual). If we're going to talk springboards, Sicily is a far larger and fertile island to use and the Ottomans had already successfully used Otranto on mainland Italy 84 years earlier (However it never saw completion because Sultan Bayezid II called off the campaign for..."Reasons", after his father, Sultan Mehmet the conqueror died).
Malta was a symbolic campaign, to rectify the error of having shown mercy to the Knights 43 years earlier at Rhodes and wiping out the last remnants of the medieval crusader orders.
Try to keep in mind the Europeans (And in the present day, deus vulting keyboard warriors) overexaggerated the importance of many victories over the Ottomans due to the fact the Ottomans kept winning and winning and winning, thus the slightest interruption in that streak is going to appear as nearly divine.
Also the sieges of Vienna and Eğer in 1529 and 1552 respectively had already proved Ottoman invincibility in siege warfare as a myth before the siege of Malta (Though Eğer would eventually fall in 1595).
Everyone wanted Malta but none more than Hitler and Sulaiman the Magnificent as it was the stepping stone to Nth Africa and Europe. It is on the front line of the European Army so to speak. It has no natural resources only strategic positioning. This video just showed the Ottomans wanted Malta to use it as a base to invade via Sicily. Malta is called the jewel in the Mediterranean and the whole Islands population was given the George Cross for Gallantry in WW2 where again it was said they changed the war. BTW the Knights were almost banished to Malta from Jerusalem where they fought bravely. Malta has never been conquered through war, changed hands many times and the peaceful people accepted the knights to some degree although yes they weren’t friends. When they warned the people to help fight the invading armada of 40,000 Ottoman it took a lot of convincing to get the locals to agree to help. Maybe hearing about Gozo, the 2nd largest island invaded, men killed and young women raped they were finally convinced who was the better choice to side with. It’s said about 3500 and 5000 Knights fought 40,000+. Sept 8th is a big feast day as both wars mentioned ended that same day on the Island. I am a descendant through DNA of the Knights of St John and very interested in this topic. Malta has 8500 year old amazing megaliths and steeped in history.
Not true. First big loss was battle of Diu 1509 when we tiny Portuguese defeated them good and sound with just 600 soldiers against a combined army of over 25k
There is a reason why this battle is considered the 3rd most epic of modern times and 6th if we include old world
As usual you guys insist on ignoring how epic Portugal is throughout its history or simply lying like claiming Cristovão Columbus is genovese instead of portuguese
My favourite part of this battle is When a Venetian named Antonio Canale jumped on an enemy vessel wearing a gambeson,and wielding a two handed sword, and “fece della persona sua meravigliose prove, con notabil danno degli inimici”, “proved himself by notably damaging the enemies” and captured a galley by himself
pretty sure he didn´t capture it by himself
grande storia!
with a 2 handed sword on a ship. Survival vs noobs would be hard enough. Survival vs trained enemies even harder. Efficient combat even harder than that. Capturing a ship ALONE? No.
by the way, if you are a Ottoman ranged unit of any kind, who do you shoot? Some of the very common, very basic, dime a dozen hostile dudes? Or the bada$$ champ with the 2 hander?
with my critical thinking detailed above, I have no reason to think that this 2 handed sword triumph ever happened, or that it could ever happen.
@@istvansipos9940 if the crew was already shattered by bombardments and melee fight why can't a specially trained dude with a two handed sword finish the job on his own by scattering the last few survivors?
@@eugeniocallegaro6618 these are new details. Now it is an already kinda semi defeated ship and crew vs the champ :- ) Fine.
1 dude with a lance, spear, or just a long, pointy piece of broken wood backs into a corridor. Stabbing outwards. A 2 handed sword is useless there. The champ can die trying, can stay and wait, can use another weapon.
In either case, the champ WITH a 2 handed sword won't take the ship.
meet the same champ in a very open space on the ship, and you are fuggd. True. But then you are not dumb enough to stay and die. You risk a jump into the sea, where you MIGHT die.
And we already assumed a wide open space for this encounter, so you indeed CAN reach the sea.
in this case, sure, the 1 dude with the 2 handed sword took the ship. But let's face it, nobody cares about such an unevetntful triumph. I think, something more glorious and heroic and bada$$ is meant with his story. With his tale, that is.
oh, and to start this whole mental gymnastics, we have to assume that a professional warrior was stupid enough to bring a 2 handed sword into an obviously crowded and well know clusterfukk (boarding action in general)
All the blood and death of a day that has slowly merged into history. On an afternoon in 1997, we were being conducted on a tour of El Escorial, not far from Madrid, and as we walked in through the entrance hall, we could see a huge, faded depiction of a naval battle on the wall. Our guide, who was also incompetent in other respects, responded to someone’s query with a dismissive “Oh, that was just some battle.” I walked closer and read the plaque identifying the scene, turned to him and told him that was the Battle of Lepanto. That wasn’t “some battle,” it was the Trafalgar or Midway of the 16th century. Unfortunately, he failed to grasp my allusion….
Do
Don’t ask a European about the Pacific War. About it they know nothing.
Maybe he was a morrocan immigrant.
@Tubba only smooth-brained individuals turn to racism so quickly
@@tubba-dg7to or just a plain ...moron!
@@tubba-dg7to they wouldn't know, but it's not their fault.
Spanish class is when i heard the name Lepanto for the first time, and i thought it was some land battle until i read Roger Crowley's "Empires of the Seas" the book starts about the ottoman-spanish conflict, the conquest of Tunis and Djerba, then moves on to the siege of Malta (one of the best descriptions i ever came across) and finnishes with the battle of Lepanto. It's a good book.
It is part of the Black Legend of the English-speakers that only a handful know how close they came to having to facing a Turkish fleet playing the same part actually played by the Spanish Armada. How much they owe to the Hapsburgs in stopping the Ottoman juggernaut.
Roger Crowley's other book, City of Fortune, is also fantastic. It follows the history of Venice during the height of it's power, roughly from the fourth crusade to the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Excellent stuff all around and has an amazing depiction of the Chioggia War.
cool intro. Your animation style has come a long way over the years. Yet your handwriting is still somewhat similar like in the beginning. feels like you just pushed your skills and got better without imitating anybody else. good job.
This was a Spanish battle, not German and less Austrian! John of Austria was the illegitimate son of the king of Spain, Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor. Charles V met his son only once, recognizing him in a codicil to his will. John became a military leader in the service of his half-brother, King Philip II of Spain, Charles V's heir, and is best known for his role as the admiral of the Holy League fleet at the Battle of Lepanto.
El imperio español utilizaba soldados alemanes como mercenarios, también en Lepanto.
We eating good today bois! SandRhoman just uploaded!
this is not a viking channel. We "dine good"*.
what's for dinner? i'm allergic to gluten you know...
Meats back on the menu boys!!
The great Don Juan of Austria lies on El Escorial in Madrid. It is a great thing to visit his tomb and greets his efforts for the cristiany as one of the last crusaders.
i can't understand how people are diminishing the strategic importance of lepanto, yes the holy league did poorly in exploiting the victory and using the following period of relative naval dominance to achieve more victorys etc, but it was a strategic victory and broke the ottoman dominance, and also marked the shift towards more firepower in european, the ottomans basicly had to learn that they could no pursue large scale naval operations in the adria and central mediterranean sea without european powers succesfully reacting anymore
also to say "they just won bc of superior firepower" is like saying a machine gun just shoots faster than a rifle.
it was a great victory for the european powers, and it was such a breakthrough that they felt much less threatened after wards
and the 17th century then told that story again, where the ottomans could only expand into the much less developed eastern parts of europea via raids even tho much of central europe was locked into a series of civil wars, and the ottomans had to basicly watch and mainly stay out bc any attempt of attacking into the west could basicly make this religious strife end as people might see a common thread.
basicly at lepanto, the ottomans shattered their teeth, they had cracked and the sultans from then new that using them without thinking strategically and clearly would make them fell out.
when they attempted the second siege of vienna, that was a last ditch attempt at relevancy on the global stage.
even if vienna had fallen there were armys on the way to recapture it. and it would likely have been retaken in time.
european army size in the meantime had increased coordination discipline and firepower were outdoing ottomans by far, and european fleets were composed of high board artillery platforms that carried the worth of entire fortresses on their decks. while europe was beating each other over the head who would control which part of the globe, any outside power seriously threatening the great powers of europe would basicly kicking the hornets nest, and what happened after the second siege of vienna was that. bamely austria would roll back the sucesses the ottoman had achieved over 2-3 centurys in much fewer time.
It seems like it is a lot like the Battle of Midway. It stopped the Ottoman advance and was a turning point but eventually the European Powers would have beat the Ottomans anyways similar to USA and Japan. Ottomans had no ability to counter future Naval Ships coming on line in the West like the Spanish Galleon. By 1600, Ottoman Naval Superiority would have been in check either way with the changing technology. Similar to how the Japanese Navy would have eventually been overwhelmed by USA naval production regardless of the situation at Midway. It would have just taken longer to see the flip in both cases had these critical battles not have been won and perhaps the Ottos would have threatened Italy and taken Malta had they won at Lepanto (for a time).
Modern historians are haters of western civilization. Whenever i see "modern historians disagree" i think of how subverted academia is these days.
There was no way on Earth Ottoman could keep dominating mediterranean against huge coalition of a dozen European countries and empires. So Lepanto didn't mean much when they didn't capitalize afterwards. Then once again you are completely ignoring Ottoman overextended thousands of miles in THREE continents and somehow tie it's huge list of problems to naval weakness alone. In reality Ottoman was doomed as soon as the line of extraordinary sultans ended with Suleiman magnificent. Suleiman never had any intention keeping Vienna, in fact he pushed far deeper than the city but when Habsburgs couldn't face him in a pitched battle he turned back and sieged Vienna. His whole intention was defeating Habsburgs significantly so they would drop their claims on Hungary therefore securing western borders. Why is that exactly, right? Vienna is 1300 km away from Constantinople and Ottoman armies had to travel that distance through underdeveloped Balkans with poor roads and bridges. They couldn't even provide enough supplies for the armies, in fact often more soldiers were dying on the road than actual battles!! If Ottoman could use mediterranean freely like Romans did they could invade deeper into Europe but Ottoman didn't have a short list of rivals like Roman empire had...
@@ggoddkkiller1342 i do not say that the naval failure is the reason for the stagnation and decline, its more of the symptom breakin out, i think we completely agree
@@ggoddkkiller1342 also funny enough the balkans are likely so underdeveloped bc the ottomans extracted the majority of their tax income /tributes from that region to finance the rest of their empire. also the fact that the europeans just sailed around their empire for far trading likely hurt them so they had to extract more from the balkans, which means that wealth could not be reinvested in the balkans.
The Ottomans went from regularly raiding across the Med to raiding one more time and never raiding again. They lost control of the Barbary Pirates, formerly their vassals, and never threatened the Med again as they had before the battle. They rebuilt their fleet, but it was never as good as the original. They never replaced the lost experience of the sailors who died at Lepanto. The modern concensus sees that the Ottomans built a new fleet and ignores that it was basically never used again. It's much more significant than is now imagined. The bravado of the Ottomans after the battle is just hot air.
"Rebuild their fleet, but never as good as original" sounds ridiculous. The design shouldn't have change all that much, and most of their experienced sailors they loss won't stay active another 50 years anyway. The many wars after Lepanto should provide them with plenty of experience, so by itself this loss shouldn't have such huge effect for the empire's existence as a whole.
Ignore the navy and never use it again? I'm no expert, but isn't the Cretan War that happen later is on an island? It's hard to believe that the Ottoman won't use any navy in it.
I don't know about raiding since finding them is harder.
Edit: change some , to .
@@Hell_O7 The next fleet was slapped together to keep up appearances, no it wasn't as good, but that's not even what I was really talking about. Naval tradition and the experience of the sailors is HUGE. If you wipe out a generation of sailors you may easily find yourself in a position from which you can never fully recover, and the Ottomans provably didn't. Not only do you lose those sailors, but you also lose everyone they would have trained if they had lived.
They raided across the Med with their entire fleet on a yearly basis. Then Lepanto. Then one more raid. Then literally never again. As for saying they didn't use their fleet again this is just hyperbole on my part. Yes they did, but never in the same way or to the same degree as they had previously. The Ottomans totally lost control of the Barbary Pirates who continued to be able sailors which the Ottomans lost access to.
You picked out specific points that looked weak and you ignored the other things I said. I'm just repeating myself now. Hey, their annual raids across the med, previously unopposed which resulted in the capture of thousands of slaves and the obliteration of entire cities *stopped.* Hey, by the way, their annual raids stopped. This is a fact. Please explain it for me if Lepanto was not relevant. Also, don't know if I mentioned this, but the North African Barbary Pirates, previously made vassals of the Ottomans became defacto independent after Lepanto, and were never brought back into the Ottoman orbit. This is a fact. Please explain these things to me in the context of Lepanto's strategic insignificance.
What do you think, the Ottomans lost control of the Barbary Pirates and stopped their annual raids and these two things just happened to coincide with the Battle of Lepanto by sheer coincidence?
@@charleslathrop9743 If a point looks weak and you don't want it to be mentioned, then don't say it. If you forgot what you've said and then re-read them. Do I need to be thorough with every single crook of your statement? No, there's no such rule, and despite what you said even you ignore some of my points.
The wars against the Safavid that happen again in 1578, which must've caused some resources to get shifted, seem to be a much bigger issue than any one battle could ever be.
If the Barbary pirates continue their raids even without that much Ottoman's support, then why should they be that sad about it? It's still a win enough for them.
The Ottoman-Venetian wars saw the Ottoman pushing back Venice repeatedly, weakening one of their biggest threat in the Mediterranean to a pretty significant degree. Conquest of Tunis help ensure that
@@Hell_O7 The Ottomans were a threat to Venice, not the other way around
@@eugeniocallegaro6618 The opposite is true too.
Venice has been a powerful and influential mercantile sea power for a pretty long time, and not only play a vital role in many previous crusades but also directly butt heads with the Ottoman one of which is in 1453's Siege of Constantinople.
The Ottoman-Venetian wars aimed to weaken them to the point of being irrelevant, which has not happened yet in 1571.
Edit: remove double @, fix grammar, and add paragraph
Müezzinzade Ali Pasha was the commander of the janissary land forces. He showed great success in many wars such as the Battle of Zigetvar. He was on good terms with the Sultan. Sultan Selim II loved her and married her to his daughter. later made Admiral. He was an ambitious and brave commander. His soldiers loved him. But he was not a Navy officer. His greatest achievement as a sailor was raiding port cities and landing troops on the shore.
Uluç Ali Reis and Pertev Pasha argued that they should not leave the bay and that the crusader fleet should be withdrawn to the bay. Thus, land artillery support would be provided. Ottoman ships were damaged from the last voyage and needed to be maintained.
Those in the Crusader navy were thinking, "If the Turks took refuge in the Gulf of Lepanto, the expedition was over, all the expenses were wasted. It is not possible to force the terrible passage of the Bosphorus with galleys. The Christian navy will be destroyed by the artillery fire of the two castles."
But Admiral Muezzinzade Ali Pasha did not accept. He found it cowardly. He underestimated the enemy. As in land wars, he wanted to disperse the enemy with a swift attack and bore the ships.
After this defeat, the Ottoman Turks built another navy of the same size within a year. The westerners were astonished, they did not dare to advance to the eastern Mediterranean. But the new navy was hastily made and the ships were not as solid as they should have been. Most of the master sailors and pirates died or were taken prisoner. There were novices left who could not even sail.
The reason for this defeat was that he was made an admiral because he was the son-in-law of the Sultan, he was incompetent and did not listen to the warnings of his subordinates.
Both warring groups had problems. But the crusader fleet overcame them.
Same thing happened in the Siege against the Knights ot Saint John. The wrong leader got into power.
@@Giagantus Yes. People are preparing their own end through arrogance or ignorance. Sometimes this changes a whole history. Wrong time, wrong people. That's why we remember real heroes with respect.
As a Spaniard I see one of the biggest victories of the Spanish Empire and the allied Italian States (Venezia !!!) in an english-speaking channel as nearly a miracle, so yeah, cool. With all due respect to the Ottomans/Turks that were formidable adversaries.
@@navarrenavarre Hey, tu opinión de supernacionalista de barra de bar te la guardas y más que solo uso cosas de la Leyenda Negra que no sé ni donde demonios sales con eso, si pongo que es un milagro que salga esta batalle en una canal en inglés, a ver si ¡¡LEEMOS!!. No pareces haber entendido nada de lo que puse ni sabes nada de lo que sé, me he limitado a alabar el video y los enemigos de la Liga, que eran formidables en cuento a asuntos militares, decir lo contrario es una tontería grosera. En la vida no cuesta nada ser respetuoso y leer al menos dos veces algo si lo has entendido mal.
Now in english: Yes I'm sure the French will have gain a lot helping the Habsburg, mortal enemies since decades, against the Ottomans, so later the same Habsburgs could concentrate their forces and money against France to try to destroy it and there is the fact that they were in a religious civil war at that moment in the whole country, that's part of the ''Leyenda Negra'' or facts ? Same with the Protestant, that's classic real politik, while your enemy is occupied against another enemy, well don't do anything. As a said in Spanish the Ottomans of that period were a formidable military power wich made the Lepanto victory even more amazing for the Holy League, there is nothing wrong to respect that kind of enemy, even more 450 years later. Don't act as if it was some years ago...
I am not Spanish but Spain was a powerhouse long after the defeat of the Armada by the English. It is an often forgotten fact. In addition, they were usually fighting on several frontiers (vs. the French, English, Dutch and Turks).
@@stefanvas6984 Yes. The outcome of the Spanish Armada expedition was an unquestionable disaster with the key factor being bad weather. Spain remained as powerful as it was before the expedition. A year later, England attempted a similar action by creating the Contra Armada with Francis Drake and Norris ( 180 ships ) which was spectacularly destroyed by the remnants of the Spanish Armada ( 31 ships ). After the British defeat they could only be pirates as they were for centuries. Easy
Yeah its kind of hard to find Spain getting any credit in english speaking channels
@@aguspuig6615 Yes, it's kind of a general obsession during centuries. Reality will prevail and it will be difficult for them and for their followers.
There is a fun fact in this battle. Miguel de Cervantes, the author of "El Quijote", fought in Lepanto and lost the mobility of his left hand.
Great video! I love your art style and narration. Have you done a video on the siege of Tenochtitlán? It is a good topic and an interesting one.
No esta mal pero peca muchas veces de minimizar a España en los videos parece que le duela nombrarla y no soy el unico; que lo opina saludos
@@williamedwardgladstone2343 Well, Spain was like the USA of the time, the single global military superpower, to underestimate their importance is nothing short of a biased view. To put it in perspective, the future children of those survivors soldiers could attend to the Philippines University... or enroll on military expeditions anywhere in the globe.
@@williamedwardgladstone2343 I think he left many crucial numbers on the table, Spain put the commander in chief of the campaign, put a considerable navy, and filled the boats with their soldiers, which is not cheap to say the least... Without Spain, Venice was doomed. Ignoring this fact is plain bias.
In a modern context, is like if we downplayed the role of USA during the war on europe against nazi germany, to the point of almost ignoring them...
@William Ewart Gladstone He only ignored Alvaro de Bazan, who repelled the Ottoman flank attempt and saved the day. And virtually every non sailor abroad was spanish. You cant make a full video on lepanto without mentioning spain.
@William Ewart Gladstone well, I couldnt hear the name juan, I just Heard don John, the only name he translated to english
This was even more epic than I expected!
As a side note, it's nice to hear that the sources for once don't disagree greatly about the numbers of opposing forces. Just before this video I have finished watching a new one about the battle of Orsha in 1514 (a third one in the last couple of months, this time in Polish), and this is definitely a problem with that battle.
In my hometown there is a column commemorating the battle and the 2 galleys that my town provided.
As a Turk, here is how we are taught about this in school:
After the peak of military might of the empire 30-40 years ago, political intrigues were also peaked and in time the empire started to get governed by less and less skilled people. In the past centuries, most military leaders took command by leading and rising from the lower ranks in the army. Now, the leaders were simply "appointed" by the higher authority. The admiral of the ottoman empire in this battle was no different.
Admiral, Müezzinzade Ali Pasha was a royal son in law (married to one of the children of the sultan) and did not know much about naval warfare. So much so that even the ottoman chronicles describe his death as:
"Caused the death of lots of valuable captains and seaman due to his inexperience in naval affairs"
He was a valuable general and a statesman, but not a seaman and definitely not an admiral.
Barbarossa, merely 30 years ago, had defeated the holy league near prevaza. Now, 3 decades later, Barbarossas own sons being captains themselves, they all got killed in this battle by the very things they had used against the holy league 30 years ago. 30 years ago, ottoman ships had cannons with higher range - much more skilled and experienced captains on all flanks and they had simply waited for right wind movements before manuevering in bulk - a concept Müezzinzade Ali Pasha knew very little about.
Vizier, Sokullu, was right when he said the holy league merely shaved the beard of the ottoman empire - but he was not taking the loss of experienced captains and seaman into account. Turks, being nomads themselves, could not raise this amount of skilled seaman ever again in history. They rebuilt the lost ships, but could not use them to dominate the waters again.
This general concept of unskilled governors and leaders still exists in todays turkish hierarchy. People are mostly appointed to positions of power depending on who they know / who they are related with instead of pure skill and merit
my professor once said - we don't know if the Ottomans corrupted the Balkans, or the Balkans corrupted the Ottomans :)))
Infact, what made the Ottoman fleets fearsome in the previous decades was the strict meritocracy, where even a slave at the roar could become an Admiral (It was the case of Uluç Ali Paşa, "Occhiali", at Lepanto) only for his achievements. The commanders of the Genoese and Venetian fleets were generally competent, but they were strictly from one of the notable families of the city, so the pool was much more restricted.
It has to be said that, at Lepanto, both the general commanders didn't do much, since at the center of the battle the ships were so packed that manuvering was impossible. The battle was won and lost by the commanders of the two wings.
When you say Turks, you mean Greeks actually. A recently preformed study found the dominate DNA in Turkey is Greek.
@@thomaswayneward Lol if there is such a work can you show us? Because I don't think even the Greeks have "Greek DNA".
@@neutronalchemist3241 Disagree, the two Ottoman wing commanders did an outstanding job, and on the Christian side only Barbarigo shone in the wings, as Doria was mediocre at best. The Holy League won because of superior firepower, superior numbers, Turkish overconfidence (they should have waited in the harbor and wait one week until the League disintegrates) and a bit of luck.
A very important factor is missing in the christian victory. Pretty much like the romans turned naval warfare into land battt with the corvus, where they can oppose their seasoned legions to much more experienced carthaginean sailors, the spanish tercios imposed their martial prowess boarding ottoman galleys when the ships interlocked and overcome the famous janissaries.
Funny fact: Colonna family is still alive and doing stuff around.
They are probably the most ancient family of Italy. It was said they descend directly from Julius Caesar.
the family of Don Juan d'Austria is also still around. One of his daughters married a Colonna and the Colonnas later inherited all the private property of Don Juan, since his other daughter became a nun and had no offspring.
Love GK Chesterton's poem "Lepanto" about this battle
White founts falling in the courts of the sun,
And the Soldan of Byzantium is smiling as they run;
@@gabrielvanhauten4169 There's laughter in that smile of the face of all men feared
It stirs the forest darkness, the darkness of his beard.
(I have the whole thing memorized. My kids and I act it out, they play Don Jon and his men, and I play the part of Mahound/Soldan/Turks 😅)
Miguel de Cervantes (the author of Don Quixote) mentions it a lot in his writings, as he fought (and lost and arm) in the battle, and Lope de Vega, Spain's most famous playwritght also dedicated a poem to Alvaro de Bazan, the commander of the Christian reserve and a key figure in the battle:
"El fiero turco en Lepanto,
en la Tercera el francés,
y en todo el mar el inglés,
tuvieron de verme espanto.
Rey servido y patria honrada
dirán mejor quien he sido;
por la cruz de mi apellido
y con la cruz de mi espada"
"The fierce Turk in Lepanto,
in Terceira the Frenchman,
and all over the sea the Englishman,
were scared to death to see me.
King served and country honoured
they'll say better who I've been;
by the cross of my surname
and with the cross of my sword"
Viva Hispanic!
@@Kivlor It curls the blood red crescent, the crescent of his lips
For the inmost sea of all the earth is shaken with his ships
(going from memory that's what I recall lol)
Amazing video, guys! I'm generally not a fan of naval battles, but this one was so well done! One of your best videos yet. Keep on with the great job!
thanks! glad you enjoyed it nonetheless!
The fact that it was seen as a miracle made it that more powerfull. Also the defeats of the Ottoman Empire at Vienna (twice) showed that they were not invincible. Sometimes that is all that is needed. Imagine a united Europe throughout the middle ages.
Impossible, didn't the allies attack their saviour sometime after the siege.
There is no invincible empire..
Even the Mongols themselves had civil wars.. Losing battles until they disappeared
@@oldgamer9992 History, why did you lose after this battle?
There would have been a united europe in the middle ages had the barbarians decided not to settle in roman territories in mass in the 4th century
You mean like worse than Hitler's united fascism. :))
Modern historians often forget to mention what would have happened if the result of such a battle would be the opposite. Maybe they wouldn't be able to do, as this would have been opened the path to Italy and Venice itself. Hard to estimate the consequences
What if =/= History
But the idea is interesting !
Very nice video. Really liked the point about the League removing the prows of their ships so that the cannons could have an unrestricted field of view. I have read that the Turks lost a large cadre of compound bowmen in this battle which they found hard to replace. Apparently, it takes years to train such men. I think that the League armed their sailors with matchlocks and crossbows that required little training.
Another very interesting and well produced video. I always look forward to your work and have watched many several times.
One of your best videos IMO, the sound affects and animation, as well as powerful narration was amazing.
My hometown is Nafpaktos aka Lepanto and still we celebrate this every year
Great video! Roger Crowley's book "Empires of the Sea" has a great section on Lepanto and the wider battle for the Mediterranean between the Ottomans and Europeans. The great European-Ottoman wars from 1453-1699 doesn't get nearly enough recognition when it comes to European history in my opinion, so thank you for this video!
It goes further back from 1453, why 1453 ?
Don't forget vietnam,
Sometimes great empires can be defeated too
"The fall of Constantinople,💒☧ of the year of fourteen hundred fifty-three by the Sultan,👳 Mehmed the 2nd, the conqueror himself in the year of fourteen hundred fifty-three, during the Hungarian,🇭🇺 Ottoman,🇹🇷 wars,💥 of the year of fourteen hundred sixty-two."
I've forgotten how long it was since I've been waiting for this video. But what mattered now is that the video is out and I enjoyed every single minute of it! Thank you!
thanks, glad you enjoyed it! we put a lot of work into this one.
@@SandRhomanHistory Usually, I am pro-Ottoman. But considering that the Ottoman Empire managed to rebuild its navy to dominate the Eastern Mediterranean again in just a few years after such defeat, I am willing to make an exception.
@@SandRhomanHistory And you half-assed it. How are you going to make a video on Lepanto and completely gloss over Spanish involvement??
It’s called “Leyenda Negra”.look it up sometime.
finally! I've been interested in your take on this for awhile.
Im not an expert so i accept that i could totally be wrong, but i get the feeling that Spanish participation in this battle is being underplayed alot. Its in general kind of hard to find any video on medieval history that gives credit to Spain on pretty much anyhting
It's overplayed if anything, Spaniards comprised a minority of the troops (ca 3-4000 over 30000) and ships (26 over 212). Only Spanish ultranationalists believe the fleet and soldiers were 99% Spanish tbh
@@SockAccount111: Wrong. It was over 7000 and to that you have to count bought mercenaries from Germany (7000) and Italy (6000) as well as 5000 venetians.
Point still stands.
@@david9243 Of these 7000, only 3-4000 were actual Spaniards, the rest being Italians serving under the Spanish crown
Another Lepanto video? Can never be enough Lepanto videos. Bring 'em on!
A beard grows back even stronger indeed, problem is that by that time the Ottoman Empire was already beginning to show small signs of hair loss
Good! Napoleon should of wiped them out
good one
They were practically balding.
@@kingofcards9516 No they began balding at the second siege of Vienna
After that battle they defeat spanish in tunis
really good. really good writing and historical summaries. very listenable delivery style.
5:18 : Don Juan, no Don "John"
I'm not surprised people started to move away from Galleys after this; those casualties are staggering. Those waters around Greece took a lot of men to Poseidon's cold embrace. Salamis, Artemisium, and Lepanto.
Well, the focus of sailing was displaced by the Spanish from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic and the Pacific, where galleys were pretty much useless, and I imagine the futher development of naval artillery made the kind of hand to hand combat galleys were used for obsolete.
Actium
Spanish losses against the Dutch rebels played a major role in that to. At the Battle of the Scheldt in 1574 for example. A Spanish commander who was also present at Lepanto wrote that the fighting there was just as savage.
Don't forget Actium and a whole lot other naval battles that are not known outside of Greek history!
@@arcotroll8530 the battle of actium is not known? ehh... i wouldn't agree
You forgot to mention that Miguel de Cervantes fought here
@William Ewart Gladstone because it's Cervantes. He went there, fought as well as he could having fever, got shot 3x, survived, eventually got home and wrote the best novel in the Spanish language
Shockingly, no one has done the battle of Djerba yet, despite it being of the same scale and significance as Lepanto and Preveza.
Eger and Nagykaniszia are also ideas.
This channel specifically focuses on Ottoman defeats. He only covered 1453.
Konu Türk tarihi olunca gerçekten subjektif video yapıyorlar
Because Lepanto was the last battle of all of these? The decisive one? After Lepanto no more battles of that scale were fought in the Med.
@@acusticamenteconvusional9936
Wow, by this logic we should only focus on the cold war since both Spain and Turkey are in Nato and they build LHD warships together. No reason to focus on Battle of Lepanto. Idiot.
@@arda213 ???
Does that make any sense?
He covered Famagusta and Candia. Why would it make any sense for him to only cover Ottoman defeats??
Waited Two weeks for this! Awesome!
I as a Cypriot must tell you that you forgot the most important thing after the victory all the soldiers and sailors rhythmically shouted the name of the great hero of Famagusta Marco Antonio bragantino
Awesome history, keep up the great documentaries!
Amazing !!! Please a vídeo of the siege of castelnouvo, oran mazalquivir and Tunez
castelnuovo is ottmans vs spanish as well!
People don’t understand how close the Ottomans were to conquering much more of Europe (they already conquered a lot of it.)
This, the great siege of Malta, and other few victories kept Europe from facing conquest and enslavement.
The Ottomans were the Islamic continuation of the Roman Empire. They managed to regain everything but Italy snd Hispania and not for lack of effort.
I recommend visiting the maritime museums of barcelona and genoa, they both have galley replicas in them and they are amazing
Brilliant work
An unbelievable video.
Thank You what an epic.
Yay, one of my favorite channels does one of my favorite battles.
As a Spaniard I'm proud.
Then revolt against the foreign occupying forces at Rota and Moron. The USA use Spain as a vassal state. It's a shame !!!
that's weird. I am proud of my students, and of my well behaving dog. For example. Things I contributed to. I am HAPPY that my ancestors saved themselves many times in history (They made me possible), but I cannot be proud of things I played no role in, nor can I be proud of a random thing, for example being born in 1 nation and not in any other nation.
@@istvansipos9940 Oh give it a rest. He feels empathy for the brave men, not unlike the one you feel for Ukraine's efforts today. These people happened to be related to him, so he calls it "pride".
But I'm sure he's equally "proud" of the Roman+Gothic coalition beating Attila the Hun, for instance. It's just an inspiring piece of history that happens to be related to your country; thus, he calls it "pride" instead of mere "empathy".
@István Sipos Pride: a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from one's own achievements, the achievements of those with whom one is closely associated, or from qualities or possessions that are widely admired.
Why cant he admire the bravery of his countrymen in the face of danger?
@@istvansipos9940 👏👏👏
Thank you for your video it's a real treat to watch after a hard day at work :)
Our pleasure!
dude, your videos are truly a 10/10
I would advice you to take a look at Siege of Nagykanizsa 1601, as it is probably the most succesfull and perfect siege defense in history, it would be a great content for your amazing channel
A point to remember would be that the ottomans fleet was in need of repair after a long season of raiding and small skirmishes (which is why they had low manpower and less cannons) and even tho the win was a huge boost in morale for the league as far as the ottomans were concerned the major loss was the loss of able and experienced seamen other than that it continued as business as usual for the ottomans
Great video! You guys are really improving by the video
thanks, yeah we're trying to push ourselves!
Incredible. Thank you!
I have WAITED for this
Don John of Austria sounds silly. He is Don Juan de Austria.
Great video. Love your animations!!
Very nice video! thank you for the great content.
It never ceases to amaze me how cruel the Ottomans were
That's why they were winning. When in Europe soldiers knew about basic ethics of war (mot kill civillians, for example), turks could just wipe out entire city, burn all the citizens and just go after the next one.
And they never changed, few hundred years after this they commited three biggest genocides before finally fading away
I think people in general can be very cruel to other people,I mean look for example Caesar's campaign in Gaul or the two world war's,or,most recently ,Putin's invasion of Ukraine,I can name many more examples.Unfortunately this has continued throughout human history to this day.
One of my favorite battles.
Including a glass breaking sound when units are destroyed would bring me immeasurable pleasure.
Subscribed right way , the best history narrative ever seen
The Holy Rosary is a powerful weapon!
This war had nothing to do with religion
@nofux8586 the Ottoman's religious composition varied with the decades
@@samsonsoturian6013
Brainlet take
sure. That's why nobody can define (in a reasonable way and with n0 assertions) what the word "holy" even means.
@@istvansipos9940
Maybe, but they sure can define what weapon means
My father was born in a house next to Juan de Austria's house in Cuacos de Yuste, Spain, it's also the place when Carlos V retired to a monastery until he died. Funny thing, until this day the people of that village are called ``Los perdonados´´, the forgiven, because there is a popular story that, when Juan de Austria was just a child, other children in the village threw stones at him and hurted him (maybe for being a bastard) and Carlos V didn't take any punishment to them.
@William Ewart Gladstone I know, I didn't say It was true, it's just a funny story that they tell even today.
Very well made. Have enjoy it. 💯
Great work as usual. Nice animations and entertaining presentation. Thanks.
The island of Cyprus is also where the Knights Templars had their archives from their time in the Holy Land. All of which was destroyed by the Ottoman invaders. We can only imagine the historical knowledge that was lost.
Glorious and great victory.
Great video. I appreciate your accuracy and abstaining from putting a Revisionist History spin on the story.
What does the EP mean in your logo ?
Love your voice very much and animation is good. Can you please cover battle of previza and djerba next and dadanails 1654-1657
Lepanto obviously changed the power balance in the mediterranean and allowed phillip II to focus his energy elsewhere
British sources have done a lot of damage to spanish achievements. I love your videos, but as my fellow spaniards are saying, the spanish contribution is underrepresented. It is not your fault at all, as you have portrayed the 80 Years War very accurately, but I would have tried to use more italian and spanish sources
@William Ewart Gladstone it's not true. Read more History and less propaganda.
I'm Spanish and I disagree.
In the same way I do not expect any English historian remembering how the Castilian fleet raided the English coast sacking several port towns during the 100 Years War, I'm also waiting more Spanish historians telling openly how the French "veedor general" sent to Spain by Louis XIV invented the new kingdom of Spain for his grandson Phillip V, destroying all the previous kingdoms of Spain, with their courts and laws. Although the new kingdom was not a more powerful one. Louis didn't need so, but just a peaceful Southern flank and, even better, a vassal of France using the "Family Pacts" even after the extinction of the French Bourbons, to obbey and serve to the French Republic and then Napoleon. So on until now.
Because the next to last Bourbon lost the biggest province in Spain with the biggest reserve of phosphate in the planet to Morocco with no ressistance by the Army just because the USA government ordered him to do so.
That is the price of our monarchy and the loyalty of our "allies".
@William Ewart Gladstone you are welcome whenever you want to visit Ceuta or Melilla and see how the normal life of any frontier town in Spain or North Ireland is "barely resisting" your funny ignorance. 🤣
Check his video on the Malta siege. A disgrace. So bias against Spain. Which let me remind you, it was the ONLY that help the knights. it made me laugh
@William Ewart Gladstone On Malta ??What an amount of BS, so you are just a troll. No worries I won´t feed the troll no more.
Love the art style great vid
Thank you! Cheers!
What is certain is that the Spanish had drawn several useful conclusions from the defeat at the Battle of Djerba and from other political considerations:
1- Command and orders had to be unified.
2- His partners in the Italian peninsula were not entirely reliable in the fight against the Ottomans.
Hence, from the first moment it was demanded that the command of the entire fleet in Lepanto be a Spanish commander and that the troops aboard the Venetian galleys be completed with Spanish soldiers. Not so much because the Venetians had few embarked troops, which was usual in their galleys, but because in this way the Spanish command was sure that the Venetian galleys would not turn and flee if the battle got complicated or went too far. Bad for Christians. Here it is necessary to remember that the galleys were absolutely everything for a thalassocratic republic like Venice that lived exclusively from maritime trade and these galleys were the power on which its trade was based. Its loss could mean the demise of Venice as an independent republic. It was this concern and the danger of unreliability on the part of the Venetians, who were actually looking forward to making a pact with the Ottomans to resume trade, as they did shortly after the battle, prompted the Spanish to tie up in short the Venetian galleys with Spanish soldiers inside them.
Some important data missing.
Venetia and Genoa were rivals at the time. So they considered each other almost like enemies.
Venetia brought most of the ships but they were lacking in infantry so Don Jphn filled them with spanish infantry.
Alvaro de Bazán commanded the reaguard and was crucial to stop the counterattack.
There were many europeans volunteers from far away countries like England.
This was a christian victory against the unstoppable, until then, turks. It was celebrated all over Europe.
With the amount of quarreling the leaders of the Holy League did it's no small miracle that they were able to accomplish anything at all.
Wow! We have to see this hellish carnage of glorious valour on film! Hasn't anyone made this battle into an epic war movie yet!!
One thing is that the Ottomans rebuilt their fleet after but it cost so much money they had to mothball much of it and helped wreck their economy. Along with the Gold from South America the Spanish were able to stabilise the Economics of the Holy League and make the battle of Lepanto happen.
I thought Spanish's gold import make the economy unstable since there's just so much of it that they decrease value
@@Hell_O7 its money coming in when your spending alot on wars, more doesnt destabilize anything just dropa the price of gold down
@@Hell_O7 Eventually, but a quick infusion of cash is good in the short term.
@@gundissalinus thanks did not know that
No actually it wasn’t the case, the real damage to ottomans was the loss of experienced sea men which they couldn’t replace
I like that your some of the Sponsor Ad is done in the style of the video 😃👍
Naval battles before the age of sail sound absolutely insane.
does is sound more sane during the age of sail?😅
This happened during the age of sail tho.
Lepanto was probably the last naval battle fought "medieval style"
Naturally they had to go away as cannons became stronger. TBH, age of sail is the most exciting period. Most medieval naval battles are just land fighting on the sea.
Sailing ships had been already used for decades in battles fought in the Atlantic, but in the Med., at that time, they were still a burden, because there the winds were much more inconstant. The use of Galleons had been one of the main causes of the defeat of the Holy League at Preveza in 1538.
@@neutronalchemist3241 No Khosrow After this battle, it seems that the Spaniards are stupid
Thank goodness for Lepanto.
Excellent video! Ottoman wars are so interesting.
I just noticed how your videos Malta 1570, Cyprus 1571, lepanto 1571,and candia, 16??, have these characters 😂
There is a number of important things missing in this:
The Holy league did exit the battle with more ships and men then they entered the battle with. In large part due to the freed rowing slaves that started to fight with the holy league forces as soon as they were freed. An advantage that the ottomans did not have because the rowers on the league ships had incentive to fight with their crews, not a gainst them.
The holy league had much superiour firepower not only because of bigger cannons but because of predominantly arkebuses instead of crossbows and bows for onboard fighting.
The galeasses of the venetians were specifically designed by the venetian arsenal to fight against ottoman naval tactics. Even when the ottoman vessels surrounded them, they could not bord the ships easyly, because they were too tall and the ottoman soldiers had to try and climb up walls to get on bord. The heaviest fighting took place around the centre galeasses and none of them fell.
The after effects of the battle were not that problematic for the ottomans on paper only. They rebuild the ships quickly, but they had lost most of their competant leadership. The loss in knowledge and experience is what they could not replace, and it was the reason for why they did abandon large scale naval activities and focused on their land conquests in the future.
The victory was not a turning point in the struggle against the ottomans advances because the holy league capitalised on the victory, but because it forced the ottomans to change their strategy.
How/in what way did the Ottomans change their strategy? Can you show me some examples?
@@Hell_O7 You know you can do so yourself ^^ you are on the internet...
Here is some starting points.
Before the battle, the ottomans were attacking italy all over. After lepanto, attacks on italy stopped.
As mentioned before, the ottomans did rebuild their fleet. In terms of ship size, stronger than ever. But this fleet never left the eastern mediteranean. They defended the east and held the black sea, they never ventured west.
The ottoman navy did help finish the conquest of tunesia in 1572. That is as far west as they went, excluding some conquests in the atlantic.
Great video! However, you should have talked about don Alvaro de Bazan, the commander of the Christian reserve and how he managed to save part of the centre (not Doria)
And the left, and the right.
@William Ewart Gladstone Literally this. There is a reason why Bazan is consider one of the greatest admirals of all times.
@@claudiotavares9580 First time dealing with sarcasm huh?
@William Ewart Gladstone It's actually entirely possible, since he was the one who countered the two critical Ottoman maneuvers that could have turned the tide of the battle (Sirocco's flanking attempt and Uluj Ali's pounce on the gap left in the Christian right wing).
@@dariusgreysun 🤓
great video!
Fantastic video about a great battle
Our Lady of Victory, pray for us!
Gloria tibi Domini!
This video about the battle of Lepanto is great, one of your best works; the fact that it took place on the Greek coasts like many of the great naval battles of antiquity, gives it an epic aura, as if the Greek coalition against the Persians at Salamis was revived, for the survival of the West. In the end you skipped some important information, such as mentioning Álvaro de Bazán and indicating the importance of his role as commander of the reserve in the Christian rearguard, being able to successfully assist the flanks and the center, to avoid any Turkish advantage (He is for me the best admiral in Spanish history, although world historiography does not give him the value he deserves, with his command the Hispanic fleet achieved great victories such as the conquest of Portugal and the aid to the siege of Oran in 1563), another fact is that the writer Miguel de Cervantes fought in this battle and was left with an arm disabled, it is also said that this battle was where the beret so characteristic of sailors was used for the first time by Christian sailors. On the other hand, something that seems exaggerated to me is what is said about the contribution of the Venetian Galleasses, I think that the fact that they destroyed 70 by themselves is an invention of Italian historiography (they may have destroyed 15 or 20 and disabled some how many more), it is true that they played a great role, but it was above all to disrupt the Turkish formation that was forced to maneuver to avoid them (which is why 70 is an exaggerated number), actually the most decisive decision that influenced the Juan de Austria's victory was to fill all the ships with the elite Spanish infantry, the so-called "Tercios de Mar" (the first Marine Corps in history), since they carried the weight of combat on the ships of the Holy League.
@William Ewart Gladstone Yes, it's true, although I was referring to the primary sources, because I don't think the mentioned historian got that information out of nothing. That is why I point to the Italian accounts of the battle, because although the Venetians may have exaggerated their merits in victory, I am sure that the Italian nationalist historiography of the 19th and early 20th centuries could have had something to do with a perspective more favorable to them. I know from what I have seen in other conflicts that Spanish sources tend to be omitted or ignored in favor of others, as may be the case with this naval battle (despite the fact that this video showed a mostly neutral view).
@William Ewart Gladstone In every comment that laments the lack of mention of the Spanish role in this video, you show up mocking them and spaniards, whats your problem?
@William Ewart Gladstone you say you have no problem, yet you're generalising all Spaniards and diminishing the role of Spaniards in this battle for no reason. Its quite obvious you have something against them.
@William Ewart Gladstone what video?
See “Leyenda Negra “ for your answer.
Oh wow I love it. Haha. Makes history more enjoyable to see things like you presented.
Spain raided the Anatolian coast and the Cossacks raided Istanbul multiple times in the decades following Lepanto, each time destroying Ottoman fleets. With Lepanto, the Ottomans lost their best ships and seamen, which they would not be able to replace for a long time.
You pronoun really good Spanish/Italian words, the battle of Lepanto was a decisive victory for the future of Europe like the battle of Platea, battle of Navas de Tolosa. This battle save Europe and save the future of all European nations
Pronounce*
Everyone do yourselves a huge favor and read "The Great Siege: Malta 1565" buy Ernle Bradford. The most incredible book on the subject Ive ever read. The valor of the forlorn men in the chapter on the fall of St. Elmo had me on the brink of tears. Amazing.
Thank you for your recommendation, I will keep this book in mind
Great book
Thank you for the recommendation.
How true!! The Siege of Malta in 1565 was probably the first major setback for the Ottomans. The Knights of St. John and the Maltese inhabitants performed miracles in keeping the Ottoman Empire away from victory in Malta. It was a great humiliation for the Ottomans to retreat from Malta not as victors but as defeated.
I fully agree that Ernle Bradford's masterpiece "Great Siege: Malta 1565 (Wordsworth Military Library) deserve more publicity.
This is great and by the sounds of it, in a second language!! Deserves a lot more likes!
excellent video
thanks!