Best YouTube Channels for History Fanatics?

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
9,983
Prefer the longer 1 hour type lecture formats, generally by military Historians. There are quite a few diffent sources were you can find these.



Western Front Association

Mostly 1 hr pomng lectures on variopus ww1 subjects,tends to be British focused.


Drachinifel

War Ships. 5 minute sguoides and occassional deep dives


National WW1 Museum

mostly 1 hour lectures



The Dole Institute Of Politics (they host teh Fort Leavenworth lectures on Military History)


Kanas City Public Libray


C & Rsenel -

30min -1 hr videos on all the guns of the Great War, teh development, trail ,adoptaion, I


ww2 history round table.

The First Invasion: Operation Torch (noting 75th Anniversary) (WW2HRT 31-02)
 
Feb 2019
1,178
Serbia
In their video on Austerlitz they also spread the claimed that thousands of Russians drowned when the French opened fire on the lake their were retreating over
Napoleon's propaganda bulletins claimed that 20.000 Russians drowned but this is logically impossible. Most of the Russian troops went around the edges of the lakes and the ones that did cross over the ice found that the lakes were rather shallow. After the ponds were drained a handful of corpses and horses was found but this was not many. The most common estimate is that at most 200 drowned and it's quite possible that the real number was even lower.

This is pretty basic and the videos Kings and Generals makes are not in-depth. Their Napoleon videos are mostly accurate for what they are but the lack of sources cited leaves me suspicious. There are some inaccuracies in several of their videos but they are mostly minor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorgedrogt
Oct 2018
2,106
Sydney
A while back I viewed one of their videos and decided to compare its text with that of the Wikipedia page on the event. I began reading, the text which I read was virtually the same as a bit which I‘d heard a bit ago in the video (It was one of their videos on the Ottomans, of course they might have done this even if they did their research but I don’t suspect they actually did their research).
I've noticed this too, but this begs the question of whether it's Kings and Generals who are using wikipedia or whether it's wikipedia contributors who are using Kings and Generals.
 

Kevinmeath

Ad Honoris
May 2011
14,137
Navan, Ireland
Would agree with Mark Felton-- short interesting stories.


Seems very good and authoritive

Have very much enjoyed Bovingtons Tank Museums 5 favourite tanks

 
  • Like
Reactions: dreuxeng
Jun 2019
21
London
Epic History uploads way too infrequently though, even though the quality of their videos is extremely high. I see Kings and Generals as being a good compromise - the quality isn't quite as high but they upload much more frequently (usually twice a week).
The thing is though it takes time to produce videos of that quality in length. That’s the drawback to maintaining high quality. I think Kings and Generals have a team behind them
 
Oct 2018
2,106
Sydney
Here’s a channel that some of you might like and is not very well known: Eastern Roman History.
Thanks for the recommendation. I've since checked out some of his videos, and I really like that he is so focused on providing videos on late Roman and Byzantine history. I enjoyed his take on the Tetrarchy in his video on whether the Tetrarchy was a bad idea (his view, like mine, is that it was a good idea in terms of dealing with the immediate challenges of the time). His recent video on Crispus was more disappointing - he recounts what Zosimus says about his death with little commentary by himself, a problem when Zosimus' account of this event is clearly partisan and at least partially false (he claims that Constantine's execution of Crispus and Fausta in 326 was the reason he adopted Christianity, but his adoption of the religion had already happened in 312). That said, a one-man channel that seeks to deal with such a large expanse of time is bound to fall short on certain topics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorgedrogt