Timelapse of Every Battle in History | History Teacher Reacts
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 сен 2024
- Battles have been a major part of the development of world history. This video ambitiously attempts to map every one of them. Mr. Terry tries his best to explain the major events going on (there's so much to cover!)
Original Video: • Timelapse of Every Bat...
Links:
Gaming channel: / mrterrygaming
Discord - / discord
Twitter: / mrterryhistory
Twitch: / mrterryhistory
Tik Tok: / mrterryhistory
Instagram: / mrterryhistory
Facebook - / mr-terry-history-10913...
TeeSpring - mr-terry-histo...
Patreon - / mrterry
Streamlabs - streamlabs.com...
PayPal - paypal.me/mrte...
For all business inquiries: contact@tablerockmanagement.com
What was your big takeaway from this video?
Europeans' favorite hobby is "honorably" murdering each other.
Violence
Pain
Hundreds of Millions of deaths throughout the centuries
move to greenland because there arent enough people to have wars and therefore no one to bug me lol
I am French, one day at school my history teacher told us: in France, wherever you go, you walk on blood, so respect this country." I understand his words better with this video.
It's crazy to think that each small dot during the video represents hundreds, even thousands of deaths, shattered destinies, many torn-apart families. History has changed forever in each of these regions...
I live in Brittany there is a lot of history here, 1km from my house there is an old Roman camp, when I was young I played in a German bunker 50 m from the house, I found arrowheads estimated at the time of the 100 years war in my grandmother´s garden and a bronze age ax head in the forest😅
Much of that was England invading France hahaha.. No idea why they hated each other so much.
@@CommonSenserules1981 They didn't "invade" France.
They technically believe to own France so you can't speak about invasion.
Especially when half the land weren't french at that time.
I mean, aquitaine was english, they lost it afterward and so on.
The french and english could have been a single country.
And at that time, english nobility spoke french and lived on the continent.
@@lepangolin4080 I suggest you get a history lesson - France is maybe the most invaded place on earth from English invasions and yes, it was French. Much of what we today are two hyperpowers fighting each other on a global scale being the British and French.
Ultimately the French lost with the battle of Waterloo and the defeat of Napoleon.
If the French speaking Vikings being the Normans did not invade England, maybe more peace and less war with the two was possible as because of that Nobility connection, the English had evolved into a Nation that saw the French throne as legitimately their own.
@@lepangolin4080it is more that English nobility was French at this time, "plantagenet", cœur de lion... It 100 years war was a war between french aristocrats to have the throne, and a part of those aristocrats had also England
@@kaeljuThe famous Richard lionheart whom every Englishman admires did not speak a word of English (the language of the peasants) but French and Occitan.
Since his mother was from Aquitaine and his father from Anjou.
And he certainly did not spend more than 6 months on this "awful island where it rains all the time and where the vine does not grow".
Technically it was more a civil war than a Franco-British war.
I suspect that Europe is not that disproportionally more violent compared to other regions. They just aren’t recorded.
That’s fair
Africa surely has had way more battles than what are shown in this video.
Africa had TONS of battles, between tribes, between old kingdoms... Heck, during the Zoulou Empire time alone there probably were hundreds of them.
The problem is : African countries haven't really been good at keeping track of their own history, especially military battles. Either because they happened between tribes/kingdoms that didn't give much value to recording such things, or didn't have the means to (lack of a suitable writing system, or made from easily degradable materials).
So yeah, there are probably tons of battles in Africa that fell into oblivion with no trace left behind.
@@welshed No...Because Africa is a huge continent but with few peoples through its history...for example, they were only 100 millions of inhabitants in the early 1900 vs 400 millions in Europe at the same time !!
Unrecorded conflicts will forever outnumber the recorded ones. Especially in the Americas - They were home to many expansionist imperial powers and much of their battle history is lost to the ages.
And in Europe especially it is important to be mindful of scale. Medieval battles could have as few as a few thousand men involved - a far cry from the battles of the modern era where hundreds of thousands may be on the battlefield. Yet both get recorded on here as just another battle and given equal status. An idea to show a more accurate map would be to vary the size of the dot to indicate battle numbers. Then the BIG conflicts would really show through.
I think one of the most interesting things about this, to me, is how long Rome remained at the top for Battles Won even after it collapsed. Yes, these are just battles that were recorded and we have documentation of, but even with that caveat, it still shows just how much of a powerhouse Rome really was.
Romechondria is the powerhouse of the cell!
I know people talk about the Mongols and the British empire a lot but in my opinion, Rome was pound for pound the most impressive empire to ever exist. No other civilization of their day was ANYWHERE close to being able to match its power and influence. Rome (and Greece to a lesser extent) was literally the birthing place of western civilization as we know it today. The world would be sooo much different today if Rome didn’t exist.
Or at least at recording their battles.
And you could add to that the battles of the byzantine empire because it was the roman empire* just as much as France is the Frankish kingdom/Empire.
Both resulted from the division of a greater empire,
both are the surviving parts of their respective empires,
both don't include their original capital be it the one from the separation or from the inception of both Empires
both have different languages and cultures than originally...
The term byzantine empire is just 1 or 2 century old, created by an historian to more easily differentiate the 2 parts, it was simply called (eastern) Roman empire when it still existed and was recognised as such by the whole Europe including the pope until the time came that the eastern Roman Empire was ruled by an Empress while Charlemagne controlled part of Italy resulting in the pope naming him the Roman Emperor, resulting in the Holy Roman Empire and the beginning of Europe not accepting the Eastern Roman Emperor as the Roman Emperor but just the Emperor of the Greeks or Constantinople.
*video didn't precise western/eastern and just added western victories to the Empire after its division.
Only difference between the 2 is that the French nation (west Francia) has survived until now in some shape or form.
Simply put it's as if France fell centuries ago and got renamed the Parisian Kingdom.
Ironically they could conquer most armies but struggled when it came to facing the fairly disorganized Germanic tribes. Particularly the ones on the other side of the Black Forest. Trying to cross that forest gave Roman soldiers paranoia as ambushes were common. A lot of Germanics fought with guerilla like tactics making it hard for an army used to fighting on battlefields to take them on. In the end "barbarians" proved too much for them to handle.
This is kind of factually inaccurate as it doesn't take into account the toughest battle of them all, getting out of bed in the morning.
YES!
I assumed that was the very first battle highlighted here
the battle of Atlas isn’t on there so I knew it was inaccurate
Holy shit if those were shown on the world map the earth would be LIT AS FUUUUCK 😂😂😂
😂🤣
I thought u being serious at first. But then the half end.. 😅
But seriously, yeah this is inaccurate. Because the southeast asia archipelago region there, the place of many pirates. Japanese pirates also actively plundering korea and china coast villages and towns.
And dont forget the active tribal seasonal wars all around the world.
I mean no need to be 100% accurate tho. It's okay since we lost so many history records.
This really puts things into perspective just how many wars have been fought over the centuries. I've covered only a few battles on my channel, and this makes those look insignificant in comparison, especially the map at the end. Good stuff Mr. Terry!
I visited Hôtel des Invalides in Paris, France a few years back, a museum that recounted every battle France had participated in since the dawn of times (figuratively speaking). There were these halls that each one represented a battle. And in the hallways even more and a big timeline with every single conflict. I think there was ONE period where there was like no conflict for 20-30 year or so before France waged war again. Mental! So, I kind of knew before watching to the end that France would be the "winner".
I found it quite interesting to watch NZ and take note of the fact that so few battles appear despite the large number of occurring ones during the 1800s. As a history student from NZ it had always caught my interest to see how NZ is always seen as a place of peace throughout history but in reality up until the 1900s really wasn't and even then you could argue that it still isn't even now.
It just wasn't recorded..The maori were extremely war like
Can someone pls tell me what NZ means?
@@Razor-fv2tv New Zealand
@@Razor-fv2tv New Zealand
@@irphern thank you ;)
My take on this is how amazing it was to see how wars have so much influence on culture and civilization that those cultures with a form of writing or a way to record events have recorded battles. I can't imagine how much brighter that map would be if every culture had a way to record the events that can be discovered by archaeologists or historians
My takeaway is don't poke fun at France. They've won more battles than any other in the world. Make fun of them surrendering if you want. They were winning battles all the way from their start to 2017 lol
Actually France has one of the strongest militaries in the world. They also have a nuclear triad - that means that they can use their nuclear weapons by rockets from land, by sea(submarines) and by air. They also have their own domestic military industry with the things like own jets - Mirage, Rafalle etc.
Of couse they have had some rough times like in WW2 but that's only because their military was backwards in their strategy compared to great powers like Germany or GB. While they dind't fall much behind after germans in terms of their weapons(it's amount and quality) they did certainly fall behind in terms of properly using these weapons in the new reality of war.
@@Razor-fv2tv They could be more industrial and inteligent to develop by themselves. That's just the way.
Mongols in 13th century didn't conquer most of Asia just like that. They have had a superior technology and tactics.
Is that So hard to understand that europeans dominated the world for some time because they were more developed while most of Africa(mainly black/subsaharan Africa) was still mostly on the tribal stage.
@@Razor-fv2tvthe major part of the wins was during Napoléon's era, ww1, Franks with Clovis and his descendants, during the century war against england. All of this opponent was great. The colonials era is not so big and France fought in Europe in the same time. So you're right but this is not so big. Moreover you can Apply the same arguments for many civilisations through time.
@@Razor-fv2tv France fought mainly in Europe historically. The biggest beneficiaries of "fights against inferior opponents" are the more colonial-minded countries, like Britain and Spain.
France became focused on colonial matters only in the 19th century. In the 17th/18th centuries, colonies were just seen as short-term cash, France was focused on the continent. During Louis XIV's time, France a bit like Germany was during WW1/2, the continental hegemon.
@@Razor-fv2tv I love how you see the exact opposite of reality regarding England. So naive. It's like, the no1 country regarding the problem you mentioned, but you can't see the inconsistency.
I think it's sad you didn't notice the battle in North Eastern Germany at the very beginning since you were focused on the Levante. It's a bronze age battle with estimates of 4-5k warriors present with 12k bones found and at least 140 different people that were identified and probably somewhere between 750 and 1000 dead. And it wasn't even in the historical record. In 1996 a worker responsible for preserving the area just found a Humerus with a flint stone arrow head inside in the Tollense river and the remains were dated to roughly 1250 BC. So not only one of the oldest battles we know of but apart from that, one of the few we know of just because of the discovery of the battlefield
I think that Battle in Germany is the largest known unrecorded battle in history.
I wish someone lived back then that could have recorded it. I wanna know what they were fighting about.
@@Kaiserboo1871 Wouldn't be surprised if it is
@@Kaiserboo1871 it was most likely a battle between some local culture and invaders or migrants from the east
At about 3:12 you can see a single dot in what is now northern Germany. That battle was probably the Battle of Tollensetal - about 4000 participants. Who were they? We have no idea. What were they fighting about? We have very few ideas - perhaps trade routes. We don't know any empires that existed at that time at that place. Almost nothing. But we have a battlefield, in fact the oldest known battlefield in Central Europe from around 1200 bc. It's so mind blowing that even though this area has been settled for thousands of years we have no idea who these people really were and that there must have been some kind of "nation" that could actually muster an army.
Come in Europe they said, it's safe they said
7:13 NAILED that editing, smooth transition!
I did not expect to get emotional over this, watching this time lapse. Of recorded battles of our history. The death between friends and brothers in arms. It's sad honestly but as humans it's natural for us to fight. And we see that here , The cultures , traditions , religious , languages have changed over time but we as humans haven't. We are the same as we are now and have been over 5000+ years. And without a doubt I'm sure there are way more battles that haven't survived the sands of time. Either it being no one documented it or the records were burned/destroyed. And yeah I'm not too surprised about Europe having the most battles. But I am surprised to see how many it actually was , more than I thought for sure. Either way it was great video and thx for reacting to it.
It's just a reflection of written history + countries that use wikipedia (China doesn't really). That's the main reason Europe is so high imho. History was made by war, probably because nature is designed to push conflicts (wether it's with other species for animals, or with other humans for us since we're so numerous that the biggest competition for ressources became other humans at some point).
Mr. Terry. The only reason I get excited for summer vacation as an adult. More uploads!!! Keep rocking Mr. T
In the modern Cold War era, you missed Korea in the 50s and almost overlooked Vietnam. The last two paused frames were 2008 & 2017. In the continental US there were 2008 dots at maybe Washington DC and the Calf/Mex border. When it jumped to 2017, those disappeared and 3 new dots appeared. My best guess as to their locations: Jacksonville Fl, Omaha Ne (SAC HQ?) and Ariz/Mex border. What they represent is anybodies guess.
I don’t know of anything that happened in Omaha that would affect this.
Probably dance battles
A lot of the 2017 African conflict was not so much post-colonial civil war as religion-based civil war - the Azawad conflict in Mali and the Boko Haram attacks in Nigeria feature prominently on that map. The other two hotspots were the civil war in Libya post Gaddafi and the ongoing war in Somalia. All of these did have post-colonial elements, but it wasn't the driving factor behind most of them.
The driving factor behind the Libyan war was NATO, Actually Hillary clinton was on the driver seat,
Unfortunately after the cold war, it's hard to confirm whatever record or documentary is out there,
The media misleads people to make more hatred against each other around the globe 😢
Damn, those Europeans historians like to write about wars
We inherited the Greek and Roman tradition of that. God Bless them.
You might enjoy Why Japan had NO Chance in WW2 a chronologically ordered list of ship production Us v. Japan WW 2.
All things considered, the number one thing to take away from is just how effective the "Domino Affect" (effect?) is. There's rarely anything that happens "for no reason." There's always something happening because something happened before.
Hatred between clans, villages, towns, etc eventually grow into hatred between cities and countries.
Not even just hatred, but loads of other influences. Land to give your people hospitable places to stay, political backgrounds, religious beliefs, and so many other factors.
The human race is a small-minded set of creatures that's so focused on thinking about the present up to maybe the next 50 years, they fail to think about their actions influencing society in the next 100 years. It's all very interesting!
I think wars were originally mainly driven by ressources (mainly food at that point), it's the same kind competition between species that need the same food in nature. The rest, came as a result, but necessity came first I think.
I know they were pretty low on casualities but I distinctively noticed the map skipping a few wars between Peru and Ecuador (three actually in 1941, in 1981 and 1995). Granted, I recon this was because of the low death toll, as the last one in particular, had less than 1,000 casualties but still, wars in South America are extremely rare, specially after WW2, and I remember I turned on the TV one morning of August 1998 and couldn't believe they were about to start a fourth war but by October they gave up.
Yes, and there was the Cisplatina War, a little more south. My history teacher said there was a point that Argentinians painted moustaches to boys faces to put them to fight, and until this day, the number of females compared to males is still unbalanced.
@@wladfiggs Aye. I'm Uruguayan so I know it well and indeed it was just like that. Due to how far it wss from Spain the River Plate basin kept some Muslim vs Spanish traditions from the Reconquista period such as beheading. When commenting about a particular battle Saemiento said that he was glad there was abour 2 km of beheaded children because their blood would feed the field and cleanse the land from the sins of men. Our ancestors were pretty psycho if I say so myself.
love your video mr terry please keep making them, have been watching for like 2 years now!!
Glad you like them!
Somehow caught the video a minute after upload, wild.
Music a bit too loud
10:40 Look at that absolute explosion in French victories. Napoleon was a force of nature. Long live the emperor.
You might notice he's been dead for some time. And that his "glory" meant the death of millions of people in Europe. So.... no. F*** him very much.
VIVE L'EMPEREUR! 🟦⬜🟥
Sweden being in the top 10 for quite some time and still being known for being nice and peaceful.
We have not been in war for 200 years. And we send troops on peacekeeping missions in the world, defensive not offensive. Our law on freedom of speech is the oldest one, i think in the world. Peace and prosperity makes a country stabil. You know helping each other, having leaders that does not only want the power, but also want to do something great with it. We have sent a good amount of our taxes to charities in poorer nations for years. But the bug of discontent and greed is growing even here.
@@lovisalindstrom7920 sweden are in 8th position in how much aid they give,, USA are at 1, Germany at 2 UK at 3..Also, everyone send troops on peace missions..Though let's remember.. Whislt the west was destroying the middle east, they were saying they were there as peace keepers.
@@markmorris7123 Yeah some western countries did send troops into the middle east with the help of a lie and bribing some UN members. US might be number one, but that is because the extremely wealthy in that country give maybe 2% of their wealth to charity. A waitress in Sweden give to charity through her salary year after year. Not everyone send peacekeeping troops. Some send troops into war which Sweden has not done since before the 1900s.
The Sweds were the Vikings mate... Get a grip
@@markmorris7123 Germany mostly send shit with some high tech shit, the US and UK are the real nations pushing, with the UK leading, still no Cruise missiles from Germany or the US.
A tad late for this vide, but you can go frame-by-frame by pressing *comma* to go backwards, and *period* to go forward
Thank you. I should be way better at this by now lol
These are only battles documented enough to have a Wikipedia page, that's a big selection bias. How likely a battle is to be here heavily depends on how thourough the local historical writing tradition was. In some areas, any skirmish was recorded, while in other a battle really needed to be massive to be considered noteworthy (hence the ridiculous amounts of dots for the American Civil War vs the few in China). In places where writing wasn't developped yet, it didn't matter how big a battle was, no one was there to record it; at most like in the case of the Trojan War it survived through oral tradition for centuries before being written (but still needs heavy archeologic investment to be confirmed).
How big a battle was isn't represented so it tilts the scale "in favour" or more decentralised areas like Europe, where countless small countries each fought their own battles, compared to China for example where major dynasties fought in fewer, but huge, engagements. Having that timeframe remade to account for battle size would be interesting.
Written history isn't the only source though. When you look at North Eastern Germany at the beginning you also see a dot. It's for a battle in the bronze age in the Tollense valley that was discovered after a worker responsible for protecting the area (something called Bodendenkmal or ground monument for signs of early habitation) found a Humerus with a flint stone arrow head in it in 1996. After which archaeologists came. They already determined at least 140 different people using the femurs with 12k found human bones in total with estimates ranging from 750-1000 dead and 4-5k fighters.
No one knew about that battle before the find, now we do know about it. The rough time, thanks to carbon dating and a rough amount of dead and with it, the rough amount of fighters present
@@Hendricus56 of course archaelogy can be used, but it makes it much less likely to know about a battle than if it had been recorded, and detecting such battle remains random if there were no sources about it.
@@Duke_of_Lorraine Yes, but it's hard to do a video including battles we don't know about. You can't just say "Oh, at that time somewhere there should have been one, let's just say it"
i was wanting to see china become very dense because of the warring periods
I'm a middle school student and history is my best subject. It just fascinates me to see not just what we have done to one another, but what we've written about one another and what we've done. I learn more from this channel than I do in school somehow and so I can only appreciate what your students have. Fun fact: The word "Armageddon" is derived from the Battle of Meggido as apparently the conflict was just that destructive.
History is written by the victors, wonder where in the time lapse (after the printed press?) there is context to the battles, even now if it's West V's others, the information will be heavily weighted to the West.
Also, nice to see when the "obvious instigators" of a battle flow from some absolute ruler controlled country to democracies, you would hope democracies tend to be reactive rather than pro-active in starting a battle.
well a better title if you want is "Timelapse of every recorded battles uncovered by year 20XX in history"
what can we do if we can't find more data of other regions, because there certainly was a lot more battles worldwide.
Spain is impressive. 387 battles won despite also being in civil wars half the time and being neutral in WWI and WWII. 🇪🇦
First what is a battle? is it 2 armies going at each other or does other fighting count if so does a Raid count how about an ambush does the Nation have to had a war declared first and whats with the obvious spit between some nations old kingdoms and modern ones yet others counted as a whole. We know wars happened in Scandinavia before the first dot we find graves of brutal deaths all over that is older but we have no records and no battlefield left behind to prove it. We have Sagas and stories of battle and raids among the Norse peoples but no proof. The first dot in Northern Europe he either does not credit to anyone or the Sea people a bit weird most likely because we dont know much about it. Battle of Tollense Valley is considered a massacre so does it count really ?
Good question.
The battle in north-east of Germany at 1200BC was an archeological found. It was dubbed "The battlefield of the Tollense valley". It is unknown who fought whom there and who won. The archaeologic findings suggest that the fighter where experienced in war and under a central command.
To answer the question what it shows me is how important documentstion is. As you mentioned this is a map of what is verifiable and with the middle east and europe being the places with the most and best kept records we tend to view history through that lens. There was no doubt battles in the americas, africa, indian subcontinent and the south pacific for mellenia but they were not recorded. When you look at how many different tribes, languages, leaderships, folk lore that exist in these places its hard to think you have all that with no battles. And thats not a knock on the map. Its accurate. Just something it made me think about. All the battles we're unfortunately never going to truly know about.
The 2nd thing i thought about. Which is related to the first thing. Is i used to argue with my friend about world wars being eurocentric and not really world wars. Now that im a but more aware, i do understand its a world war not only because of where the battles were but places like india, Brazil, Australia, maybe indonesia etc. Are still somewhat involved through aid and supplies, alliances etc. That said this map still wouldve proved young me right lol. Although the map lit up, it really only lit up over just europe and the pacific. And for world war 1 i still think i was right. Im not sure that really was a "world war" but ill concede world war 2 definitely was and probably was the only truly "world war".
Look at a map of 1914. The whole world is european with the exception of Americas.
Plus WW1 is not only the defeat of Germany. The ottomans empire was dismantled, Russia revolted, Japan became a great power etc...
In Poland:
- 1409- 1411 Great War between Poland and the Teutonic Order and the largest medieval battle in Europe (Battle of Grunwald) on 15 July 1410
- in 1604 - 1618 pol. ,,Dymitriady" or Dymitriads against Russians and also Polish-Russian war
- Polish-Swedish war (Deluge or in pol. ,,Potop Szwedzki") in 1655-1660
- in 1790's Partitions of Poland and Kościuszko's uprising in the 1794
- in the 1830 November Uprising and in the 1863 January uprising
- WW2 started by Nazi Germany attacking Poland on 1 September 1939.
- There were also a lot of medieval battles which I did not mention like Battle of Cedynia...
Fun fact: They discovered that there was a battle in today north-east Germany 2:59, probably between Germanic tribes, Slavic tribes and some Scandinavians and it's probably one of the oldest battles in the world's history. However, it wasn't mentioned in any written source - check the battlefield of the Tollense valley
Wikipedia doesn't have enough battles in China and India!
So when an European country like France said to you at the U.N. "Do not go to Iraq, trust us, it's an old country that is talking to you. A fragile antique region will collapse if we get involved in, the resentment and the result will be as catastrophic as the lack of prediction we have about it"
Trust them.
Mmmm my thoughts about the map at the end is that China looks too clean. They have never been at peace, there is always been war after war. So I guess Wikipedia is not the best place to check about that. 🤷🏻♂️
from around 1930 to the end there are a lot of dots in USA. What's that dots mean? Riots, protest, mass shooting? If yes, should we consider them as battle in this video when it's not technically part of war?
Are Europeans more war-prone or just more likely to write it down?
Yes
Both.
I would assume the fact that Europe has a history of many, many peoples/tribes/nations moving within a (relatively) small area leads to lots of frictions. Also since the early empires there is a lot of record keeping going on. Notice that many of the battles shown are in areas of more or less stable empires. Were there no battles outside of their sphere of influence? Doubtful. But people fought for food or a place to live and once the battle was over their main concerns were daily life. No need to write down the history (if you could even write) because farming was and is a lot of work. no time to talk about glory and fame.
more war prone, lastest race to live in this world
Australia seems to be the chillest place to be in. Except....spiders.
They deliberately omitted the conquests of America by the Spanish. All those battles are very well documented.
What I'm noticing is that this total map of all the recorded battles aligns alot with population density, which makes sense cause cities have high strategic value, so they're fought over the hardest. Where there's lots of people living, those are the regions most worth fighting over.
To me it tells me where the majority of written documentation of history originated. I was surprised to see how few battles are recorded in China and South East Asia, and would have imagined there being significantly more considering all the different dynasties and conflicts between neighbors.
The origin of the paper was in China, so they had all the necessary conditions to record wars earlier than other countries.
1 what you in the West consider battles we might consider skirmishes. 2 some battles are considered one unified battle in different locations because they were parts of one strategic plan. 3 because we were unified more often than not, battles are fought along borders instead of within China. I think this is fair representation.
@@linggao2602i feel like the world leaders are driving us to a clash between west and east that nobody wants and nobody needs. We should invest more time and effort to learn about each others because I'm sure that we have way more things in common than differences. I take great pride in being italian because of Marco Polo who is an historical role model for those approaching a different culture.
I love the fact that denmark and Sweden have been fighting since the 500s
Damn! You know alot of history. Ever thought of becoming a history teacher? 😏
I'm sad to say that this was not a surprise. In school we were taught about all the big wars and some info on what's happening in Africa. I was fortunate to have a history teacher that focused on the entire worlds history and not a slight mention. She also knew alot of people from different cultures that visited us and talked about their religion, cultures and things that has happen in their country. We had an african woman that has that click sound language. That was awesome.
China only recording about 240 victories was hella dumb in this video because the battles in China was vast and massively recorded between each dynasty even deep into the end of the Civil War and the Korean War.
Like the Three Kingdoms period alone has battles recorded in the thousands with the century and a half of warfare that they all had between them all. Also the rebellion of the Tang against the Jin dynasty, the entire Jin-Song War coupled with the Mongol invasion by Kublai Khan, the Ming rebellions which happened twice or thrice iirc then the Qing conquest of Ming, the takeover and annihilation of the remnants of the Ming in Farmosa/Taiwan, Qianlong's Ten Campaigns, the White Lotus Rebellion, the devastating Taiping Rebellion which itself has close to 40 major battles recorded, the Opium Wars, the First Sino-Japanese War, Boxer Rebellion, Xinhai Revolution, Warlord Period, Second Sino-Japanese War, Civil War and lastly Korean War.
Look at that statistics... Just the entire history of China from the Han dynasty alone would knock both France and UK out of the water with at least... AT LEAST 3000+ victories be it on whatever sides and with it just clocking 235 for China?! Hell no. No way.
Since the beginning of time, people have made weapons, at first to defend themselves from stronger predators, then they realized that by killing someone, they can take their goods. And so the wars began. We humans are a warlike species, regardless of the situation we will always find a reason to go to war, no matter how pacifist we think we are. I hope it doesn't sound so strange, but this is my personal opinion.
I love your videos, keep up the good work.
There are always those that want to find a reason to go to war, but those kinds of people are not be trusted with anything, especially governmental positions. So you need to highlight all the good things that good people does, it is an active choice.
Even though I do not believe in religion we can still see the story of Cane and Able as "from the beginning people killed each other over the question of who owns the land and what do they do with it". Peace in a political way will be there as soon as human kind goes extinct. Unfortunately being a history teacher has taught me that. The best we can do is try to prevent wars and fighting as much as possible.
I love how Czechia just pops out because of Hissite wars 9:01
This is the sort of videos that shows why the EU is vital for Europe and why we must hope it succeeds for a very very long time!
EU is ruining europe, a lot of people hate it
Yes. That!
I kinda noticed the bit condemining Europe , mainly British disrespect of the freedoms of indigenous people of the Middle East when trying to establish national borders to settle timeless tribal conflicts in the region and then the total blanking when the battles in the US , mainly as a result of the US government"s removal by varioue state removal acts , and then by slaughter of the native American people and brushing that aside by referring to the Medican War as a conflict with an old imperial / colonial power . More stars across the US during the 19th C than on the Star Spangled Banner , not forgetting the US invasion of Hawaii of course .
I’m impressed that Rome remains on the top ten since its arrival
They counted them as one entity while let's say the Greeks to dozen different ones.
@@johnkimble4119because it was 1 consecutive empire through time.
Protip you can click the gear in the youtube video to slow down the video speed
Europe, are you okay?
No we're not we like to record our murders
@@Mr-__-SyLMFAOO 💀💀
what were the battles going on in the USA after ww2?
Looks weird, doesn't it? Racial unrest maybe? But to be honest the video doesn't define the word "battle" so who knows what they were trying to show.
My take away is Europe loves a fight
then you are wrong, we europeans really dont want to fight, we hate it. BUT we will protect ourselfs and what we have and we will go a long way in doing so. its difficult to aggregate us into a fight. but if you manage to do so, we do not back down, just look at ukrain who is/was massively outnumbered both in men and guns from the start! the support they got from us europeans and a little later americans didnt come immediately, it was fast. but still the rus couldnt take the country(luckily and im glad), thinking of just pure guns,tec and man power they should have steamrolled Ukrain in a matter of days. but europeans dont bakc down no matter the ods. and managed to give enough great resistance until they got help from europeand US.
What have I learned?
1. people kill whether we have guns or not.
2. if you look at the map, you are tempted to believe that as long as you live in isolation, like Australia or Greenland, there are no wars, but if you look a little closer, there are remarkably few wars in Canada, and they are neighbors to the U.S. so you have to ask yourself:
"What have they done RIGHT, and why has the U.S. never learned from them?"
I'm not too surprised by the scale of the numbers, but I am surprised how fast the US eclipsed Rome and that it hasn't caught up with France yet.
cos wikipedia is obviously going to be Us focused
@@-JT-543 If it's US focused, wouldn't the US have more listed wars than France?
@@Merennulli because france uk etc have more??? They’ve existed longer and been involved in far more wars. The whole time-lapse is western centred, US most of all. More focus on the US so more data points obviously.
@@-JT-543 In that case, your response doesn't make much sense in response to my post. France has more and the video shows more. The only one surprised at that is me, and obviously if I was getting my incomplete knowledge from Wikipedia, I wouldn't be surprised by Wikipedia's answer.
@@Merennulli i don’t see how you’re not following? Wikipedia is a US originated website and thus has a greater focus on US conflicts. Leading to an inflated
US count, but the longevity and sheer number of conflicts UK and France have been involved in still means they have a larger number despite US inflation.
love how europe just lights up between 1618 and 1648.
also i think the pre-written battles are likely based on archaeological finds of mass graves where a majority of the skeletons show unhealed wounds, implying the violent deaths of many, as you would rarely see outside of a battle.
the fact that early warfare was conducted with weapons and strategies that revolved primarily around bonking your enemy on the head with a blunt instrument, so hard that their skull brakes in a circle around the base where it attaches to the spine, causing the spine to go up into the skull, also helps to determine whether a battle took place or the mass death was by natural causes like a plague or starvation.
The so-called 30-years war was probably the most devastating experience in German history up to WWII. The loss of human life was unbelievably high. It was the zenith of the catholic-protestant confrontation but at the same time the final attempt of the Holy Roman Emperor to establish a unified German Empire. So if you ever ask yourself why Germans are highly suspicious of people using religion as an excuse for politics, look no further. The lesson learned: NEVER let religion dictate politics and never let politicians use religion for their goals.
Can I ask why France gets all victories of its predecessor states counted but others like Germany don´t? After all, todays France has as much in common with the 14th century Kingdom of France as Germany has with the HRE.
because germany was formed by prussia, and france was formed by france, known at the time as francia, only the name changed
also the HRE was formed by francia, so we can argue that france indirectly formed germany
@@charlesl3847 Mate, Francia is not France. The HRE developed out of the easternmost fraction of Francia, France out of the westernmost. Both absorbed parts of the middle kingdom. Also, Francia was more germanic than it was french / gallic. In case you didnt know, the Franks were a german tribe.
@@vloplob i know that, but still francia was the country from which france originated, making it half french
@@charlesl3847 Francia is also the country Germany originated from in your logic. So its at least half German as well.
You missed the falklands… a key war in the 80s. Britain on decline facing the aftermath of the 1976 recession. Whole bunch of banking reforms and preventatives. The ten week war was a valiant victory
Politics is the biggest killer. That's what I took away from that. Threat will always exist, and conflicts, therefore, will always exist as well.
Power is the problem, not politics. Wars are fought for the sake of power, and since most people corrupt in the process, there will be more and more wars. However, you can also change a lot in a positive way if you are not corrupted by the responsibility that power gives you
I find it funny that there's one war in Alaska, some dude fighting a moose.
FRANCE n 1.....For quitters ! it s amazing ! isn t it ? Read bokks and stop your Frenchbashing. kisssss
I find it interesting how humanity is almost like a hive mind, it’s relatively peaceful for awhile and then BOOM like half those world lights up. And then goes back to calm and it happens again.
Anyone notice how the US, alone in its history, just jumped into the top three and never left around 1860? Models are great to show the whole of things.
Shows they are a country that survives on wars
We have accounts of battles that were fought and won before Megido. But Megido is the first battle that we have an account that describes how it was fought. Remarkably we have written accounts from both the Egyptians and the Hittites, who both declared victory.
unfortunately France attracted a lot of covetousness and it had to defend itself
It seems to miss all pre-Columbian battles in the Americas, including battles during the conquest.
one more thing you should not mentionted in this video at 10:43 : 1821 was the revolution of Greek people against Ottoman empire , this was the start of taking back our freedom and our land, liberating our people
Battle of Ongal Romania Bulgar and probably Slavonic forces under Khan Asparukh defeat a Byzantine army led by Emperor Constantine IV near the mouth of the River Danube. As a result, a Bulgar kingdom is founded on former Byzantine territories in the Balkan peninsula.
War is natural. Peace is temporary
Germany going from basicly 0 to 400+ in just some seconds is funny
Hwell, my take on things is: fertile areas and areas where other hard to get resources are attract more of an attention from any species and for carnivores and playful omnivores greater populations mean that there is more competition and ultimately playing (for keeps) seems to be one of the safety valves and if it is not relieving the pressure enough, the next safety valve called fighting is triggered, then battle, then war and there has not been so much pressure that the safety valve of nuclear war has had to be tested in real world in it's full effect and affect.
This is what i want to see when it comes to reaction content, actual input and new perspectives on videos, not just somebody that sits there and says "oh" every 30 seconds. Great Video. Thanks mate.
I noticed dots popping up in the US even up to the 1990s. Im curious what events those would be. Only thing I can think of would be police/civilians conflicts that turned into massive events.
my guess are violent protests
I swear I read somewhere that there were WW2 battles that took place in Svalbard and Greenland. I wonder why those aren’t on this map. I also don’t see the Attu Island battles on here.
Here is the story of a battle that never happened.
In Thule in 1914 there was a danish trading station. The polar explorer Einar Mikkelsen tells us, that the much anticipated first ship in the spring with new supplies was late one year. What was disturbing to the local inuit people was, that sea-ice was not the reason. They could see for them self, that the ice was long gone. Melted. So they showed up at the trading station demanding answers.
The manager there - and he was running things alone - now faced the task of explaining to them the existing of world war one. To a people, where hospitality was shown by guests sleeping with hosting wife. Where deadlocked conflicts were solved by dance and song battles. Which by the way was quite serious, because the loser might need to leave the village, trying to survive in the artics alone.
But the manager succeeded. To a point at least. The next morning all the hunters in Thule - and there was 15 to 18 of them - showed up in front of the store. With their rifles. Something that had never happened before.
They demanded he put them on a ship to Europe, so they could sort out that mess down there. That nonsens with people shooting each other. Had to stop. Supplies were needed in Thule!
I can see why aliens do not talk to us. In this context our nature looks like a jar of flies eating itself.
Notice how a lot of battles happened in china around 180 - 210 ad. He didn’t cover it in the video but he said it was the han dynasty, the golden age of china but it was the 3 kingdoms period. The han dynasty lost most of it’s power so china broke into many many small warlords fighting over controll. After around 20 - 30 years of constant war there were only 3 left. Liu bei, cao cao and sun quan (I think) eventually they each declared themselves the emperor of china and they all belived they were the true rulers of china. Liu bei probrally had the most legitimate claim to the throne since he was a distant cousin of the previous emperor. After that they each created their own dynasties. Lie bei created the shu dynasty, cao cao created the wei dynasty, and sun quan created the wu dynasty. The founders died a couple of years later. During this period the 3 kingdoms were stuck in a stalemate for around 10 or so years. The wei goverment was overthrown and the empire was now run by the sima family. After they took controll, they captured shu in about a year since after the chancellor died (Zhuge Liang) who was considerd a genius and the person who basicly did everything in the kingdom since the emperor was more interested in women than the empire, died. The kingdom quickly fell due to the lack of compitent leaders and lack of highly skilled soilders. Wu fell shortly after that and china reunified again under wei. The end.
Fantastic video! Learned more from this than 10 years in school about the world and wars 🤯
Being a Brazilian-Canadian and seeing this makes me think how odd it is that both my countries had very little recorded conflicts. Of course, Brazilian recorded history is only a little over 500 years old, (1490's when Portuguese and Spanish divided South America with the Treaty of Tordesilhas) and Canada's is about 400 (with the first settlers from France in 1604). Both Canadians and Brazilians have young societies, with little self-identity and patriotism. Especially due to the number of received immigrants from parts of the world that were under direct fight. But one interesting point is that Canadians hold their ancestry relations, and Brazilians don't.
It was common, when I lived in Brazil in the 90's, to see Asians, Middle-easterns, Europeans and Africans, but it was hardly presumed that they wouldn't speak the language or even to be first-generation immigrants. In the WW2 era (and the Brazilian Military dictatorship), with a large community of Germans, Japanese and Italians, laws were passed prohibiting people to have commercial relations to these immigrants. Many were arrested as the government declared support to the Allies.
At that same time, Canadian Forces had just come to life. Unfortunately, we have little record of contributions for being part of the UK Common Wealth, thus recorded as UK action. And maybe shadowed by the USA and UK troops in the Normandy battle and spread across Europe, although we do have a lot of pride in it.
Brazilians were only 25k pairs of boots under the command of the US. One of the late pastors of my church in Brazil was a veteran medic surgeon in the Forças Expedicionárias Brasileiras (the smoking snakes).
FUN FACT: Brazilians love to use sayings in their daily basis. The expression "The snake is gonna smoke" (as in it would smoke a cigarette) means something like in American English as "Things are going south", things are about to get bad. I could hear my wall to wall neighbour yelling at her kids: "Quit fighting! Or else, the snake is gonna smoke!!!" hahaha, funny times
What I see when looking at the map at the end was that there is a correlation between more battles and denser populations.
Yes, the map shows where people live.
As a Swede I'm amazed we managed to get on the top ten list at all and stayed there for a while too O_o
Well remember that we had a couple of hundred years of more or less constant war with Denmark, Poland, Russia...
The fact that Rome is still number 8 is really cool. This video shows that modern humans are so recent and everything goes by so fast. We're so old yet so young
Rome hasn’t been around for centuries and it’s still in the top 10. Surreal.
There’s not a lot of recorded battles in a lot of that map. The highest density is in Europe, then the US…but there’s probably tons of reasons why other areas aren’t as covered
Much of it was the UK and France...
And they delete around ten centuries of Roman history, the Byzantine Empire was never existed, it was Rome, almost the same Rome ruled by Diocletian. Rome didn't end in 476 but 1000 years later.
@@nicoladc89 It was not Rome though, Rome fell. They were mostly Greeks but still what's left of the Rome Empire.
@@CommonSenserules1981 Western Rome fell, Eastern Rome fell in 1453, it was Rome exactly the same Rome ruled by Diocletian or Galerius.
It's funny how here it's named France something that wasn't France but something that was Rome is called in another way.
It's nice to see someone with so much about the history of civilizations.
Is it bad that, for some reason, the colors of the map, I wasn't seeing the land. I thought the ocean was supposed to be the land. It took me about a minute in to realize it.
it is kind of bad 🥲
The thing i take away from all of this is, war seems to be a driver of evolution/innovation and those regions with more conflicts have generally been more advanced throughout history.
Yep, competition really drive us forward
France and England (later the UK) have always had such a history of bloodshed. Does make me wonder what an alternative universe where they were closely allied would look like. Perhaps the British Empire would be a joint endeavour with France that would have been so powerful it is still in full swing today.
Who knows. But that's the brilliance of history I suppose.
My takeaway by looking at the final map is that most battles are concentrated relatively close to the equator where most people live or have lived and where the culture was developed enough to record history (duh), which explains Europe being completely covered in battles. It's not that Europeans are the most violent, they just happened to be a lot of people living in a relatively small and habitable area (compared with the vastity of inhabitable territories in Asia and Africa, Russia, North and South America) and one of the most culturally active part of humanity throughout history resulting in a lot more recorded conflicts in total. As mentioned, there were for sure conflicts everywhere you could find humans, but not all civilizations were evolved enough to record history and at the same time happened to be crammed in a relatively small portion of the world. This then becomes a cycle: more people crammed in one area, more conflicts, more push to evolve and overcome other people, and so on.
The fundamental reason why we are so violent is not that "humans suck", I hate when people give this easy answer. Fighting for our needs, desires, over different opinions and resources is not an exceptional thing about humans. We are animals and basically in every animal specie there is fighting for food, territory, mates, etc. Humans aren't that different, they are just vastly more intelligent resulting in an extensively wider range of reasons to fight over and much much larger scale conflicts.
It's how nature works, we just happened to have evolved eccessively.
What this shows me is that Europe has the most documented history in the world. No way was it peaceful everywhere in the world until Europeans showed up to conquer them lol
i love history and you show such a passion for it and great knowledge of it and the students you have are very lucky to have a teacher like you
What's freaky is that after all of those wars, after all of those generations, you and I are standing here today as our ancestors have survived something i can only call apocalyptical.
What on earth happened in Kansas/Missouri in 1953??
Racial unrest, maybe?
Watched this video right after your other one analyzing Simple History's video "stop saying the French are cowards in war"... The trophee for the most (recorded) battle victories speaks for itself. (Not sure it's a good thing, though ^^)
Crazy how I directly knew which battle the first battle in Swedish territory was
The Han Dynasty fell in 220. All the dots that popped in China between 190-250 was the Three Kingdoms war which began with the Yellow Turban Rebellion. Come 270 it was the beginning of the Jin Dynasty
Napoleonic France was insane.