This video is amazing and extraordinary. This video make my day thank you for amazing video and stunning video but brother when will the video on Skanderbeg come?
Such a great victory for the Crusaders. HRE sacked the capital city of seljuks and absolutely tamed them. The seljuk sultan surrendered to Barbarossa while on his knees. The Iconium was also a spiritually most important city for the turks. Barbarossa literally struck a sword on their chest and avenged all other Crusaders' defeat with this victory. Thx for covering this magnificent battle.
The strength tenacity and bravery displayed by both the Crusaders and the Moslems during this era is truly inspiring. Imagine what they could have accomplished if all these energies were directed in one direction for the betterment of humanity.
Great video mate. One correction tho, army number of both sides was 65,000 turks versus 40,000 HRE. Reference, Arnold Buhler "The Crusade of Friedrich Barbarossa". Sources have always been controversial on that subject. But we can be sure the seljuqs had more men, overwhelming advantages in this battle. Also, the funny thing is, according to the ignorant turk fools, they won all crusades.(first, third and sixth crusade succeeded) In fact, the turks were wiped out from history if Barbarrosa had established a new Crusader state in their capital city (Iconium) instead of marching towards Antioch. Edit; Just in case any irrational turk bothers me with some copy/paste replies from the internet, I could easily copy/paste from the internet too. What did I write in my initial comment.? " Sources have always been controversial on that subject. But we can be sure the seljuqs had more men, overwhelming advantages in this battle" I also noted that Iconium was a capital city of seljuks. So that city was an important place, a stronghold, the heart of the seljuk turks in that battle. And the most valuable settlement for turks in Asia Minor. These are historical facts. Here's a copy/paste "most historians think the higher troop estimates are exaggerated and propose 12,000-20,000 men, including 4,000 knights." On the other side, what was the size of seljuk turkish army? 10,000 men during the Battle of Philomelion (1190) prior to the Battle of Iconium, the crusader vanguard forces under the command of the duke of savoy Barbarossa's son were 2,000 men. As for the Battle of Iconium, the army size of the crusaders was 15,000 when faced the main seljuk army outside of the city gates. Seljuk forces have combined with Kilij Arslan's garrison contingent of 10,000 men plus his son's 22,000 Qutb al-Din's field army. Estimated 32,000, which means larger than the crusaders. Moreover, Kilij Arslan II himself was commanding the seljuk army during that battle. As soon as the duke of savoy stormed the gates and assaulted the city the seljuks performed flanking maneuvers and Kilij Arslan's garrison forces linked up with his son's field army to encircle crusaders. What is this video about? The battle of Iconium and the third crusade So, I suggest instead of attempting to distort history and changing the subject, you learn to deal with historical facts.
Yes and then defeated again lol then they tried again in 1683 only to be defeated again which started eugenes crusade that ended with sack of bosnia 1697 after battle of mohac 1687, slankamen 1691 and zenta 1697
The Turks fight as mounted archers, avoiding close combat with the enemy, but here it seems that they were more into the close combat , and that is why they failed unlike their other battles, in which they maintained their traditional tactics and in which they crushed many Crusader armies but why they changed their traditional tactics here ? bad leadership , them becoming more sedentary ?
As far as you can see, this was a two-phase battle. One phase was a siege and the other one was a field skirmish. So, they haven't changed any tactics here, it was all about Barbarossa's bravery and determination. He was also well aware of Seljuk's horse archery tactics and took necessary precautions. Besides thats not the only battle in which Crusaders defeated the turks, the turks were also defeated in the Battle of Philomelion (1190) prior to the Battle of Iconium. Moreover, there were many battles in which the Crusaders crushed the turks despite being outnumbered such as the Battle of the Lake of Antioch 1098 the Battle of Sarmin 1115 and the Battle of Hab 1119.
@@-Angelscor- Mounted archers are not invincible so it is normal for them to be defeated from time to time, but just as the Crusaders defeated them in battles, they lost more battles to them Your interpretation is based on glorifying the Crusaders, especially Barbarossa. Yes, it is clear that Barbarossa took his precautions well in this campaign, but I do not see that this is the only reason I think that after sedentarisam the Seljuks lost their skill as mounted archers since not all mounted archers are equal. The same thing happened with the Hungarians against the Mongols
"sedentarism " You mean that I guess. The garrison forces situated in the city during the siege were more "sedentary". The main seljuk army that trying to encircle the Crusader's outside the city gates mostly consisted of "horse" archers. More mobile force rather than garrison troops. These archers were outmatched by Imperial cavalry. That's the summary of the battle. As I said that was a two-phase battle.
@@-Angelscor- again , not all mounted archers are equal. Those who lived for generations in relative peace and sedentarism or semi-sedentarism will not be at the same level as their ancestors who lived in constant tribal wars and a harsh nomadic life The fact that the German knights always caught the Seljuk cavalry is evidence that they no longer mastered their traditional tactics like feigned retreat
No, the sejluk still were masters of traditional mounted archery tactics and did not lose any capability of that talent. Again, it was all about Barbarossa's brilliant counterattacks and military skills. He knew exactly how to seljuk turks fight well aware of horse archery tactics, which he witnessed during the second crusade and battle of Philemon. (just before the battle of Iconium) He implemented countermeasures against the enemy's tactics. That's why imperial cavalry easily chased down and hunted the seljuks mounted archers. Also, keep in mind that the same seljuks stopped the Second Crusaders and defeated Byzantium at the Battle of Myriokephalon in 1176. But this time they faced a much-prepared and much-disciplined army( HRE and Barbarossa).
All ways good to see you post. Very informative and entertaining.
This video is amazing and extraordinary. This video make my day thank you for amazing video and stunning video but brother when will the video on Skanderbeg come?
Thank you Raj 🙏. I am very glad you enjoyed it. Skanderbeg video is in the works. Sorry I do not have a date on it yet. But it’s coming my dude.
This battle was huge and bloody.
Good video by the way
Thank you ! Yes it was for sure.
Great Victory
Such a great victory for the Crusaders.
HRE sacked the capital city of seljuks and absolutely tamed them. The seljuk sultan surrendered to Barbarossa while on his knees. The Iconium was also a spiritually most important city for the turks. Barbarossa literally struck a sword on their chest and avenged all other Crusaders' defeat with this victory. Thx for covering this magnificent battle.
The strength tenacity and bravery displayed by both the Crusaders and the Moslems during this era is truly inspiring.
Imagine what they could have accomplished if all these energies were directed in one direction for the betterment of humanity.
Thanks I love your video well made
Your welcome. Thank you!
Great video mate. One correction tho, army number of both sides was 65,000 turks versus 40,000 HRE. Reference, Arnold Buhler "The Crusade of Friedrich Barbarossa". Sources have always been controversial on that subject. But we can be sure the seljuqs had more men, overwhelming advantages in this battle.
Also, the funny thing is, according to the ignorant turk fools, they won all crusades.(first, third and sixth crusade succeeded) In fact, the turks were wiped out from history if Barbarrosa had established a new Crusader state in their capital city (Iconium) instead of marching towards Antioch.
Edit; Just in case any irrational turk bothers me with some copy/paste replies from the internet, I could easily copy/paste from the internet too.
What did I write in my initial comment.?
" Sources have always been controversial on that subject. But we can be sure the seljuqs had more men, overwhelming advantages in this battle" I also noted that Iconium was a capital city of seljuks. So that city was an important place, a stronghold, the heart of the seljuk turks in that battle. And the most valuable settlement for turks in Asia Minor. These are historical facts.
Here's a copy/paste
"most historians think the higher troop estimates are exaggerated and propose 12,000-20,000 men, including 4,000 knights."
On the other side, what was the size of seljuk turkish army?
10,000 men during the Battle of Philomelion (1190) prior to the Battle of Iconium, the crusader vanguard forces under the command of the duke of savoy Barbarossa's son were 2,000 men.
As for the Battle of Iconium, the army size of the crusaders was 15,000 when faced the main seljuk army outside of the city gates. Seljuk forces have combined with Kilij Arslan's garrison contingent of 10,000 men plus his son's 22,000 Qutb al-Din's field army. Estimated 32,000, which means larger than the crusaders.
Moreover, Kilij Arslan II himself was commanding the seljuk army during that battle. As soon as the duke of savoy stormed the gates and assaulted the city the seljuks performed flanking maneuvers and Kilij Arslan's garrison forces linked up with his son's field army to encircle crusaders.
What is this video about? The battle of Iconium and the third crusade So, I suggest instead of attempting to distort history and changing the subject, you learn to deal with historical facts.
One of my fav battles. Thanks for making this
Me too. You are welcome !
Great video
339 years later Turks were at German capital
Yes and then defeated again lol then they tried again in 1683 only to be defeated again which started eugenes crusade that ended with sack of bosnia 1697 after battle of mohac 1687, slankamen 1691 and zenta 1697
Only to be defeated twice 😂
Bro Mount And Blade Warband?
3:10
@@amadbiscuit Yes Which mode
@@ilbey19.00 it is anno domini 1257
Ther armor of the muslims is extremelly inaccurate for the late 13th century
*late 12th century. And that goes for both sides.
The Turks fight as mounted archers, avoiding close combat with the enemy, but here it seems that they were more into the close combat , and that is why they failed unlike their other battles, in which they maintained their traditional tactics and in which they crushed many Crusader armies
but why they changed their traditional tactics here ? bad leadership , them becoming more sedentary ?
As far as you can see, this was a two-phase battle. One phase was a siege and the other one was a field skirmish. So, they haven't changed any tactics here, it was all about Barbarossa's bravery and determination. He was also well aware of Seljuk's horse archery tactics and took necessary precautions. Besides thats not the only battle in which Crusaders defeated the turks, the turks were also defeated in the Battle of Philomelion (1190) prior to the Battle of Iconium. Moreover, there were many battles in which the Crusaders crushed the turks despite being outnumbered such as the Battle of the Lake of Antioch 1098 the Battle of Sarmin 1115 and the Battle of Hab 1119.
@@-Angelscor- Mounted archers are not invincible so it is normal for them to be defeated from time to time, but just as the Crusaders defeated them in battles, they lost more battles to them
Your interpretation is based on glorifying the Crusaders, especially Barbarossa. Yes, it is clear that Barbarossa took his precautions well in this campaign, but I do not see that this is the only reason
I think that after sedentarisam the Seljuks lost their skill as mounted archers since not all mounted archers are equal. The same thing happened with the Hungarians against the Mongols
"sedentarism " You mean that I guess. The garrison forces situated in the city during the siege were more "sedentary". The main seljuk army that trying to encircle the Crusader's outside the city gates mostly consisted of "horse" archers. More mobile force rather than garrison troops. These archers were outmatched by Imperial cavalry. That's the summary of the battle. As I said that was a two-phase battle.
@@-Angelscor- again , not all mounted archers are equal. Those who lived for generations in relative peace and sedentarism or semi-sedentarism will not be at the same level as their ancestors who lived in constant tribal wars and a harsh nomadic life
The fact that the German knights always caught the Seljuk cavalry is evidence that they no longer mastered their traditional tactics like feigned retreat
No, the sejluk still were masters of traditional mounted archery tactics and did not lose any capability of that talent. Again, it was all about Barbarossa's brilliant counterattacks and military skills. He knew exactly how to seljuk turks fight well aware of horse archery tactics, which he witnessed during the second crusade and battle of Philemon. (just before the battle of Iconium) He implemented countermeasures against the enemy's tactics. That's why imperial cavalry easily chased down and hunted the seljuks mounted archers. Also, keep in mind that the same seljuks stopped the Second Crusaders and defeated Byzantium at the Battle of Myriokephalon in 1176. But this time they faced a much-prepared and much-disciplined army( HRE and Barbarossa).
Frederick Barbarossa Superhuman but he never learn to swim hahahahhahahahah !
nobody can swim in 60kg plate armor
@@ImperialDiecast no my friend he really did not know how to swim !
Try swimming in a suit of armour 😂😂😂