In search for origins of Croats and their ethnic name And as Byzantine Emperor Konstantinos Porphirogenetos wrote in his work "Peri ethnon" known under Latin name "De administrando imperio" around the year 950, in chapter XXX: "Croats (Hrovatoi/Hrvati) lived in that time there from the side of Bagibareia (Bayern, Bavaria) where now are the White Croats. One of their clans, namely five brothers: Klukas, Lovelos, Kosentzes, Muhlo i Hrovatos, and two sisters: Tuga i Buga, separated from them with their people, came to Dalmatia and found there Avars, holding that land. And for some time being in war, Croats prevailed and killed some of Avars and forced others to subdue to them. From that time rule in that land Croats (in Porfirogenetos' text: Hroßatoi [Hrovatoi], proper ethnic endonym: Hrvati; in Latin language: Chroati, Croati). And there it has still in Croatia Avars, and on them is visible that they are Avars." In chapter XXXI Porphirogenetos wrote: "Croats, which now inhabit the sides of Dalmatia, they originated from unbaptised Croats, which are called also White.[...] Those Croats came to the emperor of Romai Heraklios ... So, according to the order of the emperor Heraklios these Croats took the arms and expel Avars from there, they settled by decree of emperor Heraklios ... where they inhabit now. In that time had the Croats as arkhont (Greek word for: leader, duke, Latin: dux) the father of Porga. Emperor Heraklios had sent and brought from Rome priests, made of them archi-episkops and episkops and presbiters and deacons, and he baptised the Croats. These Croats had in that time arkhont (leader, duke, Latin: dux) Porga." So, according to the emperor Porphirogenetos, Croats/Hrvati came to Dalmatia and to Pannonia and Ilyricum in the time of Byzantine emperor Heraklios (610 -641) as ally of Byzantium fighting against Avars. The land from where Croats came in Porfirogenetos' text is named as magna or White Croatia (Bielo Hrovatia). According to what we know today, Croats lived during the 9th and 10th century in parts of north-eastern Czech, through Silesia, and southern Poland around Krakow. But also chronicle of Nestor from Kiev (12th cent.) mentions Hrvati/Croats as one of nations in ancient Ukraina (9th and 10th century), giving them the place in text between Radimichi and Dulebi/Voliniani, what is area from todays region of Zhitomir and Vinitsa in central Ukraina to the Galič/Halič, south of Lawow (Lviv) around upper Dniester river. Significant is that Croats are named as White ... and what this means? As we know, nomadic horseriders from central Asia stepp area take colors to mark the sides of the world: black is north, red is south, white is west ... and green or yellow is east. It seems that people that wore the name "White Croats" were actually of eastern nomadic stepp origin. Because, if there were "white"/western Croats, somewhere there had to be "eastern", probably original group wearing the name Croats/Hrvati. During the 19th century in the location of ancient Greek colony on river Tanais (today Don river), in the mouth of Don to the sea of Azov (part of Black sea) were discoverd two stone tablets with inscriptions in Greek alphabet, containing the name of the ruller of the city (king having the last name Sauromat, what is actually the form of ethnic name Sarmat) and the list with the names of important citizens. Tanais stone tablets are dated to cca. year 200 AD. Some of the names are clearly Greek and some others are belonging to the group of Iranian languages, among them is written: Horouathos and two times Horoathos (son of Sandarz), which is the form of Croatian ethnic name: Hrvat (sg.) and Hrvati (pl.). Croatian ethnic name today offten comes as a last name, especially in form Horvat. Croatian ethnic name designating country Croatia today in Russian language is: Хорватия [Horvatija] translated into English writing system to be pronounced as: Khorvatiya. In Polish language name of Croatia is: Chorwacja [Horvacja], in English phonology pronounced as: Khorvatsya. In Croatian language itself the name of country is: Hrvatska, and the name of people is: Hrvati. It seems, in conclusion, that original Croats/Hrvati were irano-phonic people (speaking in some of languages from Iranian language familly) in close connection with Sarmatians around river Don and the Black sea. Horvat is also today very frequent last name in Croatia (cca. 8 500 persons), in Slovenia (more than 13 000 persons), in Serbia (cca. 7400 persons), in Romania (3 400), form with marked accent on letter a; in Czech: HorvAt (920 persons), in Slovakia (758), Hungary (746) etc. ... there are also other written forms as: Chorvat (offten in todays Slovakia and Czech); Horwat (500 persons in Poland), Chorwat and so on ... The last name in form: Horvat: in Russia (249 persons), in Ukraina (80 persons), and surprisingly in Uzbekistan (260 persons holding this last name); form: Horuvaty is in Ukraina (13 persons in Kherson oblast), Korvat in Ukraina (50 persons), Karvat in Belorussia (Brest region: 70 persons) etc ...
There was never ever an empire which called itself Byzantine. There was just one small, ancient Thracian settlement called Byzantion at the tip of Eastern Thrace long, long time ago.
@@ΠυθαγόρειονΘεώρημα Greece has been there before the Roman Empire... and Italy is a mix of different ethnicities and people that have invaded the peninsula. Plus No Emperor.
@@ΠυθαγόρειονΘεώρημα Roman Empire is still not dead. So long as Muslim Rome (Turkey) exist, the Roman Empire still lives onwards. HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH YOU ARE FUNNY THEO!
What surprised me most about this was how the Empire kept retaking territory and counterattacking even up to its very end. It didn't just sit still and die slowly like I thought it had.
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men).
@@Universal.. Also during the time when Constantinople fell, the Albanians under Skanderbeg fought and defeated many Ottoman armies. By this time, Albania was independent of course.
@@ΒασιλείατῶνῬωμαῖων There were a lot of illyrians by the the time of the collapse, and the latinized language that you speak of was mostly concentrated in the shores of dalmatia. What this fool doesn't understand, is that modern balkan slavs have the same genetic makeup of their ancestors.
@@pavelthefabulous5675 Yes ... Skanderbeg must be placed in the rank of the greatest generals that history mentions and that the Turks were well advised in naming him Prince Alexander in memory of Alexander the Great. Source : Gibert 1914 Here are some more than honorable battles of the Albanian army of Skanderbeg against the Ottoman Empire: 1- Siege of Krujë (1450) League of Lezhë - Skanderbeg (🇦🇱) - Vrana Konti (🇦🇱) Albanian troop: 8,000 men, a quarter of them infantry; 1,500 to 4,000 garrisoned in Krujë under the command of Vrana Konti. Against Ottoman Empire - Murad II (🇹🇷) - Prince Mehmed (🇹🇷) Ottoman troop: 100,000 men, Ten guns. Result: Albanian victory. Source: Francion p. 89 2 - Battle of Albulena (1457) League of Lezhë - Skanderbeg (🇦🇱) Albanian troop: 8,000 to 10,000 men. Against Ottoman Empire - Isak Bey Evrenoz (🇹🇷) - Hamza Kastrioti (nephew of Skanderbeg)/ Traitor. Ottoman troop: 80 000 men. Result: Albanian victory. Sources: Hodgkinson p. 148. Franco p. 320. 3 - The battle of Otonetë League of Lezhë - Skanderbeg (🇦🇱) Albanian troop: 5,000 men Against Ottoman Empire - Mustafa Pasha Ottoman troop: 15,000 men. Result: Albanian victory. Source: Francione, Gennaro (2006) [2003]. Aliaj, Donika (ed.). Skënderbeu, një hero modern: (Hero multimedial) 4 - Siege of Krujë (1466-1467) League of Lezhë - Skanderbeg (🇦🇱) - Tanush Thopia (🇦🇱) - Lekë Dukagjini (🇦🇱) Republic of Venice - Nicolo Moneta (Venetians) - Baldassare Perducci (Venetians) Albanian-Venetian troop: 13,400 men. Against Ottoman Empire - Mehmed II (🇹🇷) - Ballaban Badera (Albanian traitor) Ottoman troop: 30 000 - 100 000 men . Result: Albanian-Venetian victory Source: Babinger, Franz (1978). Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time. Etc ... Şemseddin Ahmed 🇹🇷 (1469-1534), better known by his pen name Ibn Kemal or Kemalpaşazâde ("son of Kemal Pasha"): - "The Albanians, these tigers of the mountain wars... have rebellion as their religion. Even their worst warrior is one of the strongest and bravest on the battlefield, as if he were a knight on the legendary horse. But he doesn't have a horse, nor the proper weapons for battle. Instead of a horse, he has a spear that strikes like lightning, he has spears whose tips are full of posion like the sting of hornets, he also has a wooden bow with some arrows. Moreover, he is stronger than iron... " Source: - Ibn Kemal, Historian of the Turkish court during Skanderbeg's war against the Turks.
@A guy Constantine the Great had a Greek mother, but Constantine the Great was of Illyrian descent through his father Constantius Chlorus or Constantius I, Caius Flavius Julius Constantius (c. 250-306), was a Caesar from March 1, 293 to May 1, 305 and a Roman emperor from May 1, 305 to July 25, 306. He is one of the four emperors of the tetrarchy established by Diocletian. Of Illyrian origin 🇦🇱 (born in Dardania in Upper Mesa) and military by profession, like the other tetrarchs, he married (according to the hagiography) Helen, from whom he had at least one son, Constantine I. Source: François Zosso and Christian Zingg, Les Empereurs romains : 27 av. J.-C. - 476 apr. J.-C., Paris, edition Errance, 1995, 253 And in my list they are all Illyrians. (I gave you the source) Several of the most-outstanding emperors of the late Roman Empire were of Illyrian (🇦🇱) origin, including Claudius II Gothicus, AURELIAN, Diocletian, and Constantine the Great, most of whom were chosen by their own troops on the battlefield and later acclaimed by the Senate. Source : Illyria historical region, Europe, Encyclopaedia Britannica.
It's normal that you have no idea since we did such an attack, you didn't even have time to think. I come suddenly one night and add your kingdom to my empire mehmet the conqueror
heraclius is by far the most tragic. Imagine fighting a 2 decade long war against the persians, finally reconquering the levant and egypt, and losing it all to the arabs a decade later
@@havucadam74 herclius was the roman emperor at the time of Mohammed (عليه الصلاة والسلام) he was kicked out of Syria after khalid ibn al Walid won yarmouk (as far as I remember)
@@havucadam74 Herclius was emperor during the rise of islam the arab caliphate took egypt after a decade he reconquered from the sassanid empire , the ottoman empire didnt exist yet , so he isnt calling the ottoman empire Arab you just dont know the time period very well the ottoman empire conquered egypt which was the mamluk sultanate after the fall of constantinople , egypt wasnt byzantine territory in 1453
_"The city has fallen, yet I still stand."_ *charges into battle* Those were the final words of the last Emperor of the Romans, Constantine XI, uttered on the 29th of May, 1453.
Bro, but u forgot trabzon and the epirus despotate... These two division of eastern roman empire/ byzantine empire survived for 15-20 years after the fall of costantinople
@@Thessalonian100 funfact : muhammad sent a letter to heraclius, the letter is an invite to islam. He refused tho. If he converted, the history will be 100% different aswell. There are some theory why he dont want convert. First, from the islamic source, he actually wanted, but he was scared to the Roman people that his reigb will be abdicated.
@@yeasty7742 There's like 0 actual hard evidence that he ever even knew of Islam and what it actually was (most likely, he an his advisors saw muslims as sect of jews. ), not to mention his alleged intensions to convert. The letter (if it actually existed) would almost certainly not reach emperor himself and end up with some of his officials. Reason is simple: no one knew of Muhammad, so his letter would be considered of minor importance and not worthy of emperors attention.
@@imd8875 muhammad actually was popular between arabians, and he sign letters in many places, and not to mention in St. Catherine in Sinai and some letters to severals major leaders in Middle East. I don't say that he knew Islam, this is according to Islamic source, I don't know exactly. But, there some letters that sent to Heraclius. You can search it
@@imd8875 he also known among jews in medina. His tribes also the major tribes in mecca, and also his tribes always go to several places in Middle East in caravan to trade. So, there is possible. And also, Muhammad is one of the members of the Bani Hashim, which is the custodian of Kaabah and leader of Mecca, ofcourse he is well known among people
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men).
@@shawnv123 The Western Roman Empire did, yes, but the Eastern Roman Empire never fell and later went under a new name (the Byzantine Empire). It was still the same kingdom.
@@Radbot776 because they destroyed their armies fighting a pointless war with the Sassanids and they had no finance or defense to fight against them. Ultimately the start of their decline.
Everyone is speaks about the wisdom of Constantine for dividing the Empire in two and moving the capital to Byzantium and gives Justinian so much love for his efforts in reclaiming the West, where is all the love for Basil II? Guy deserves props as well
Ive never seen such a detailed video like this. Normally videos that show every month are ones that show maybe a single war between many nations. But this showed the history of an entire empire in the range of 1,000 years including every MONTH. Very well done!
@@Turtle5454 I believe Byzantium was Rome too, however the people within it in my point of view were the inheritors of the culture. Not the original Romans that inhabited Italy. But either way civilizations evolve regardless. Imagine if Byzantium survived and colonized, making greek speaking colonies around the world.
@@KAI-bk6vb Basically, it goes back to the indo european migrations, the italics all spoke proto-italic upon entering the italian peninsula until they branched into separate tribes such as the latins, umbrians, samnites, lucani, brutii, sicels, etc. They all then branched off and spoke different varients of italic languages, among them was latin. The Italics were essentially the ancient italians. The latins conquering the other italics would be similar to athens hypothetically conquering and unifying the greek world. Latin is an italic culture, just as much as a greek state like sparta was to greece. Now, yes the romans did conquer the Mediterranean sea, and with that they invested in the provinces they conquered and made them romans. However, latin rome started, and ended in italy. So I do not see any point that contradicts that unless you count those successor states that lasted like 2 years but regardless dalmatia was conquered by the kingdom of italy and syagrius's forces were assimilated by the franks. Even after the fall of western rome, italy remained roman, barely anything changed in fact, not until the lombards came in and divided the italians however the gene pool wasnt effected by the minimal amount of lombards that entered. As for the byzantines, well as the natives spoke greek that doesnt mean they were culturally greek. The governmental practices were still of latin roman origin, and even the sporting events and many other byzantine customs were brought through from ancient latin rome. So it really wasnt fully greek, it was a hybrid between latin and hellenic culture. Overall, yes there were romans all over the Mediterranean, I only acknowledge two countries as the two heirs to rome. Italy gets western rome, and all of ancient latin rome, and greece gets the byzantine era, as they were the last to preserve medieval roman culture. Sorry about the essay i was bored.
@@KAI-bk6vb Also if you wanted an exact "roman dna" it would probably be of R1b haplogroup, as that was what the ancestors of the romans carried into the italian peninsula. However, the byzantines on the other hand would lean towards J2. However overall we could basically say R1B and J2 would be the two equals for "roman dna". What makes italy special is it included both, distributed throughout the peninsula. North is more R1B, south is more J2, and central is a hybrid of the two. Edit: I just read up on this now, I believe the exact origin of the ancient latin romans were of the R1b-U152 Haplogroup.
@@KAI-bk6vb Yeah, the title of Rome is a complicated one due to it lasting 2,200+ years. It was bound to pass between other people. But im glad it was passed on to the greeks as they preserved roman civilization and did it well.
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men).
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men) .
@@atomicpower8227 I really love Roman history, I watch all the movies and play all the games about Roman. I even dream that Roman reunite again, continue its romance.
You know that you will never achieve your goal of stealing the Greek byzantine history and make it Part of italian history right? Just to remember that to you.
@@ΡωμανόςΔ́Διογένης-θ6δ Dream on beach, you know nothing about history and are the guy who is extremly jealous of Greece. Shame on you for existing! But you will never overcome your jealousy, Greece will allways speak Greek like it's past ,its ancesorts the Byzantines🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷.
@@ianlilley2577 nah,it feels like a very harsh wound after the Arab Invasions,and it feels like a slow painfull death after Manzikert and the 4th Crusade
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men).
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men).
@@Universal.. Albanians aren't Illyrians lmfao, yall are just 50% DNA from a turk and 1% DNA from a goat, the Illyrians stopped existing long ago, most of the Emperors you listed up were Greek/Thracian and Serbians (non slavic ones of course), or maybe you are a sort of bot, because I refuse to believe a living pearson is as delusional as you, spamming the same cap all over the comments of this video
As a Turk, I was fascinated by the history of Eastern Roman. Think about it, you have been fighting and surviving countless enemies on countless fronts for over a thousand years. It was Eastern Roman that elevated Roman's splendor. Definitely one of the mightiest empires in history.
as a spaniard i love the ottoman empire, the fall of constantinople was the best conquest of all tlimes because istanbul is still turkish and not greek!.
Don't forget that your ancestors knocked the Byzantines out of the Middle East (Eastern Romans stole land that belonged to prehistoric people older than them). Ottomans and Turks resisted the Crusaders, don't be ashamed. hope Mehmed is smiling right now. Istanbul forever. 🇹🇷💪
@@halaldunya918 I am from the Kayı tribe, who founded the Ottoman Empire. I am proud of my ancestors. However, all this does not change the facts. It is necessary to admire an empire that has resisted dozens of enemies for a thousand years.
50:22 the fall of Philladephia in Anatolia Philladephia was sorrounded for 90 years and is regarded as the last greek speaking citiy in Asia. For the Americans that wonder where the name Philladelphia came from. EDIT: It means "brotherly love"
You mean like solely Greek speaking? Because until 1922 and the exchange of populations btw Greece and Turkey, many cities in Anatolia, like Smyrna or Trabzon were massively Greek speaking
@@vanmars5718 Misinformation detected. Greeks and Greek language have never been the majority of Anatolian cities. Trabzon and Izmir were mostly Turkish at that time. Most of Greeks were speaking Turkish because their language was useless at that time. Turkish was the language of ruling class. Anatolian Greeks learned Greek after the population exchange. Actually it clarifies whose culture was superior.
@@hurriyetperver5272 The Greek language was the undoubted majority language of Anatolia starting from the Hellenistic period and accelerating to the medieval period with the Byzantine empire. Under the Ottomans, Greek remained the official language of the Greek Orthodox Church (Ecumenical Patriarchate) which under the Ottomans became the only official church to put all other Orthodox people unde it, Greek was used as a lingua franca in commerce and in civic papers choosen by many ottoman administrators (no matter their ethnic origin). Greek was printed in the ottoman coinage and the major ecclesiastical schools of the empire were Greek. After the 19th century with the Reformations in the Empire, civil schools could be established and the most renowned ones in Izmir, Trabzon, Istanbul etc were the Greek schools in which even wealthy ottoman turks could choose to study (since the empire couldn't yet feel that they needed such civil schools for the muslim population). Anatolian Greeks were Greek speakers in the majority of them. Thus we have the traditional dialects as the Pontic dialect and the Cappadocian dialect and the two major accents/regional tongue as is the Constantinopolitan speech and the Western Anatolian speech (which was heavily influenced how modern Greek pronunciation evolved). The only Anatolian Greek communities which did not spoke Greek were special villages of Cappadocia and the Karamanlis. These two. In cities like Izmir which the Greeks accumulated most of the wealth, even turks had to know Greek and they spoke Greek. I'm not sure what kind of nonsensical information you have and try to spread on a subject that is not even some old ancient history but a modern history which cannot be distorted by some false propaganda.
It’s sad to watch the long history of the Eastern Romans, and see their gradual decline through out the centuries. I think most of us can argue that Byzantine was never the same after the fourth crusade😔
@@09stoneheart ehhh. Okay fair. You’re not wrong, but it was more than just Manzikert. Manzikert was just a battle. The Turks decimated the Romans. Following the battle, Romanos IV tried to retake his throne after being released by Alp Arslan and after yet *another* civil war, the Turks capitalized on Rome’s weakness. Now the 4th Crusade? That shit left a scar in all our hearts. It will never fully heal, bro😒
@@09stoneheart I mean they not only defeated the Seljuks later but vassalized them and the crusaders states. Roman power was still obscenely strong during the Komnenian era and they saw a truly amazing cultural and economic flourishing
Interesting that you didn’t include the byzantine rump states of the fourth crusade like other videos about this topic. (Empire of Trebizond, the Despotate of Epirus, and the Empire of Thessalonica) Edit: Also, in May 1410, Gallipoli was recaptured for a month.
@@christopherhardy8808 Exactly. Epirus and Thessalonica, for example, were ruled by Franks. So they cannot be considered successors of the Eastern Roman Empire
To anyone wondering why Cyprus' borders were like that from 688 Ad to 875 AD, its because Justinian II and Abd Al- Malik reached an agreement that they would jointly occupy and exercise power over the island.
Basil II the Baptiser of the Rus and the leader of the Varangian Guard of the Rus. When Basil II used the Rus in his battles he increased the size of his state, but after him the Roman empire declined in using the Rus as its mercenaries, and relied instead on Normans and Franks, and that's when the decline set in. The Roman empire was made great by Basil by his baptism of the Rus in 988 and his use of their mercenaries. The modern Greek reliance on the French and British has been their vain demise into mental slavery and nationalism, and has led to the collapse of their identity as Romans part of the multi ethnic Roman state based in Constantinople that stretches from Central Europe to the central Middle East. The British and French can betray the Greeks all they like, and the Greeks will still crawl up to kiss their feet as if they are their saviours rather than their oppressors. Sing of Lord Byron, wave your US inspired flags, and watch the Anglo-Americans use the Turks and Germans to subjugate the Greeks and use them against the Russians. Watch the Greeks treat their true friends as enemies, and treat their true enemies as friends. They have forgotten their baptised spiritual children, and have handed them over to destruction.
@Basil II of Macedon the Vardaskan slayer Why would I be offended? It makes perfect sense for Basil to extend his influence by such a marriage, as the Rus were baptised by him, which makes him their godfather, and at that time they were the largest country (territorially speaking) in Europe. Both the Rus and the Romans enjoyed resurgent strength in the 10th and 11th centuries, and both unfortunately declined in the 12th and 13th centuries. From the 11th century, we see Roman emperors employing Norman mercenaries instead of the Rus Varangian Guard, and bringing Turkish mercenaries into Thrace. Stupidity. This self defeating madness is what led the Romans to allow the crusaders into their city in 1203/4, and that was the end of their civilization. The Rus, on the other hand, repelled the crusader Teutonic knights and then the Turkish Tartars, and did not stop conquering the East all the way until they reached the far West in Alaska. The greatest mistake of Tsipras, and a grand useful idiot he was, was to antagonise friendly Russia at the behest of his Western masters and debt collectors. Basil II was great and worked with the Rus, and that was their joint greatness.
@Basil II of Macedon the Vardaskan slayer I think one can take it spiritually and symbolically that Moscow is the Third Rome, but it is very hard to do that literally, because it never took on the identity of being Roman instead of Russian, nor did it officially change its name. The German empire went all the way to literally claim to be the Holy Roman empire - fortunately, the Russians never followed this delusion. It was, in fact, more than a century after the fall of Constantinople that the Russian sovereign took on the title emperor, but emperor of the Russians not the Romans, and the city of Moscow always officially remained Moscow. The Roman Senate did not move to Moscow, nor did a Roman emperor grant the title of Roman emperor to a Russian Grand Prince. I am not claiming what should or should not have happened, merely stating what did happen and the known facts. Spiritually, Moscow is the Third Rome, and the Russian state is a godchild, witness and spiritual heir of the Christian Roman empire. If Moscow wants to call itself literally the Third Rome then it must officially change its name and do so, and the Russian Federation can change its name to whatever it wants. But I don't think that is the greater point. The greater point is that persons who share the common spiritual heritage of the Christian Roman Orthodox empire should maintain this heritage and serve their interests by maintaining friendly relations with one another, rather than working to undermine one another, and thereby serve the interests of the modern West and its claim to be the heir of Greece and Rome. The dictum of the Roman empire was united we stand, divided we fall. That is my point. Be wise and maintain your common interests, and don't work to undermine one another or to spread mistrust. In fact, I would even welcome the West, whether Gothic-Latin or Anglo-Frank into the world of the Christian Roman Orthodox, if they wish. I would welcome everyone into this world, because as a Roman, politically speaking, I am a true universalist. Everyone should learn Greek besides for their own national language. We can all share the glory and celebrate it.
Rome as a country lasted from 753 BCE to 1453 CE. The first and last rulers of Rome were named Romulus, and the first and last rulers of Constantinople were named Constantine.
@@_semih_ wierd date. The Nicaean empire was actually expanding in 1250, if you were to say after the crusade in 1204 or during the reign of John V a century later.
@@rezatinambunan2062other thing the ancient rome(latin)ather the medieval east rome(greek)other the holly roman(german)and other the third rome(mosk russian)the name is only a name for a political game and power.the original rome empire finish at 470 Konstantinoupoli was a continietium but it was developed to something else.
"We need help!" They need help! So they called the pope. "Hey pope can you help us to get rid of Seljuks? Maybe take back the holy land on the way? Come on, i know you want to take back the holy land " "Yes i do actually want to do that, lets make a crusade."
Very cool video. Tho I got two mistakes. FIrst being fact that Leo II didn't rule that long, he died few months after coronation and his father/co-emperor Zeno become next emperor. Second one is portrait of Leo VI which is actualy Jesus. Leo VI is the dude that's bowing to him (on the mosaic that's the source).
My bad, thanks for pointing it out. My editing software must have made a mistake by not showing Zeno... Concerning the portrait, yes it is also a mistake.
@@KheyPard There is also an other mistake, if I may. That is that the Despotate of Morea did not just fall entirely in May 1460, with the exception of Salmeniko of Achaea, but also Southern Laconia was still free. There the government in exile of New Rome in Mystras formed an other government in exile, in the Mani Peninsula, with Vitylon (Oitylo) as it's capital, along with many other nobles who fled from the Turks, and the local nobility. Essentially, they founded the Republic of Mani, which was governed under a Laconian Senate created by Roman Greeks, a direct political continuation of the Despotate of Morea and the Roman State. They had all elements of an independent state, with their own specific land (about 2000 km2) and own population (about 50,000/60,000 people), and own borders with the Ottoman Empire, along with foreign diplomatic recognition, had it's own internal and external policies and it's own military and navy. Their government was formed as an aristocratic/noble federal republic, where each house ruled a minor area and it's leader was senator. The Imperial System was abandoned as an institution, though they still honored their past lords and emperors. However, the fifth and last son of David Megalos Komnenos of Trapezount (Trebizon), Nikephoros Megalos Komnenos settled in the Republic of Mani in 1474 AD, and there not only was he recognized as a Maniote Citizen by the Laconian Senate, and did he found the House Komnenus of Mani, but also was given the title of the First Elder of the Senate, something like being a President, in lieu for his imperial heritage. His family, later called Stephanopouli, were arbitrates of the Senate for many generations. Now, this Republic of Mani, later also called Hegemony (and Beylik), survived as a political institution all the way until the Great Greek Revoltion (Greek Revolution of 1821 AD), with the indomitable Roman Greek Maniot always defending their freedom from the Ottoman Turks, who invader their land countless times, and were pushed back as many more, and who often declared war against the Ottoman Empire to rescue their enslaved brothers from the foreign supression. Eventually, they united with the Modern Greek state, first with the Messenian Senate, then with the Morean Senate and eventually merging with the Roumelian Senate, forming the First Greek Republic. Due to the above reasons, if one wanted to create a complete historical animated map video on the Roman State, he should not depict it as vanishing from the map in 1460 AD, but instead then focus on the Republic/Hegemony of Mani, the invasions of the Turks against it and their expreditions in Morea, but also it's unification with Greece, and then the history of Modern Greece until today. For Greece is thus, the direct and uninterrupted political continuation of the Roman State, as founded by Romulus in 753 BC above the Arcadian Greek Palanteum in Latium (the Palatine Hill).
As a Saudi Muslim, I like to say that I am very impressed with the Byzantine Empire, because they are the owners of a real civilization, and I also admire Constantinople during the Byzantine rule when it was (the Queen of Cities), and I am very impressed with Byzantine architecture, especially the Hagia Sophia Church, and I admire the Orthodox faith, and I love reading (The Byzantine Arab Wars) like a battle Yarmouk and the fall of Aleppo during the reign of Emperor Nikephoros II, etc. Love from Saudi Arabia to Greece 🇸🇦🤍🇬🇷.
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men).
@@john_k.7027 I was referring to the Illyrians ascent of the Albanians. The greatest scientific authorities of the world have pronounced themselves on the INDIGENOUS and Illyrian origin of the Albanians. I will quote among others: - 🇩🇪 Gottfried Leibniz - 🇸🇪 Johann Thunmann - 🇩🇪 Ritter von Xilander - 🇩🇪 Franz Bopp - 🇩🇪 Jakob Fallmerayer - 🇩🇪 J, von Hahn - 🇩🇪 Paul Kretschner - 🇦🇹 Norbert Jokl - 🇦🇹Maximilian Lambertz - 🇬🇧 William Leak - 🇬🇧 Stewart Mann - 🇬🇧 Dane Holger Pedersen - 🇮🇹 Angelo Masci - 🇦🇹 G. Mayer, H. Olberg - 🇦🇹 R. Solta - 🇨🇵 A. Ducellier - 🇭🇷 Milan Šufflay - 🇭🇷 Radoslav. Katicic Etc ...
@@john_k.7027 First of all I open a parenthesis about the name of Albania or Albanians quoted by Strabo (around 58-21/25) in the 1st century BC and Claudius Ptolemy (around 100 - 170 AD) in the 2nd century AD. It derives from the name of an Illyrian tribe, the Albanoi, which was located around the city of Albanopolis (now Zgërdhesh located in the region of Krujë). Moreover, even today, a region of Albania, from the north of Tirana (between the rivers Mat and Erzen), is called Albëni (gheg dialect) or Arbëri (tosk dialect). But this name Albanoi with its various variants (Arbanites, Arvanites, Arvanitis, Arvanos, Arban, Arbani, Arbanon, Arnavuts, Arnauts, Arbëri, Arbër, Arbëni, Arbën, Albën, Albanois, or Albanians) really began to spread when the Albanian territories became a field of hostility and a buffer zone between Byzantines and the new Slavic invaders (Serbs, Croats etc.. ...) towards the beginning of the seventh century AD. Several writers of the eleventh century, including Michel Attaliate and Jean Skyltzes, have recounted this kind of confrontation and widely spoken of these Albanian mountain tribes. It is the Angevin chancelleries (Charles I of Anjou, brother of St Louis, proclaimed himself king of Albania in 1272) which, in the 13th century, conveyed the name of Albanian or Albanians, which spread rapidly, like wildfire, throughout Europe. It should be noted that the Albanians never use this name (Albanian) to designate their own ethnic group: they call themselves Shqiptar, that is to say son or child of the eagle. Source : Albanais: histoire du Moyen Age au XXe s, P.54, Mathieu AREF (Histoire et langue) ou l'incroyable Odyssée d'un peuple préhellénique.
@@john_k.7027 From the beginning of the Paleolithic the territory of Illyria (formerly, from the two banks of the Danube to Epirus) was occupied by men as proven by numerous discoveries of which the Karprina caves dating from approximately 160.000 years (currently in Croatia), the Gjatan cave (in Albania near Shkodër), etc. . Eugene Pittard (🇫🇷) affirmed in 1916: "I have already said elsewhere that Albania seems to me to contain the most important archaeological and anthropological documents for what concerns the origins of the MOST ANCIENT POPULATIONS OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA; populations that, at the dawn of history, we see appear under the name of Illyrians! Sources : (The peoples of the Balkans, antropological sketches, Neuchâtel / Paris)
@@GloryToTheUnitedStates6037 Then why did Saint Paul write his Letters to Romans in Greek? Why did the Romans have Greek Schools of oration in Rome, along with the Latin ones, the latter of which they had closed in the Social Wars? Why were the Romans so presintent in their old Arcadian Greek descendance, which they attested alot? I have asked you these questions elsewhere, yet you refused to answer, perhaps for not having arguements to come up with.
@@GloryToTheUnitedStates6037 And you are that idiot who would not answer to my agruements on why they were, based on their own attestments which are backed by archaeologic discoveries. Seems you had no counterarguments.
@@GloryToTheUnitedStates6037 What an inverted cysthus of a cinaedus you are. First you mock me, but then you shut up because you have nothing to say, right? What a fine piece of work you are...
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men).
How fitting that the last emperor was a Constantine. Also, two years before the "empire" ended, Columbus was born in Genoa - warps your mind. Amazing video - Thank you! This is one you save for reference.
Amazing that the Roman Empire basically made it to the beginning of the modern era. Another mind blower: the same empire that had its roots in a time before the Persians, before the classical Greeks, before Alexander the Great…lasted until GUNS
@@rt9637 Well, that’s a subjective time measurement, but yes, I think from 1450-1500 is a good transition point from the old world to the beginning of the new one. Rome finally ended, the americas were discovered and connected to the world, the Renaissance was beginning, the mongols were gone, etc. Rome definitively falling for the first time since the 500s BCE is a great transition point from old world to new.
The Anti Greek sentiment in the comment section is actually hilarious. You may be ignorant, hateful and you may cover your eyes and your ears when some certain historical facts come up, but history itself does none of those things, history knows very well what happened.
@@ΒασιλείατῶνῬωμαῖων i am sorry for my nationalistic and fanatic comments. I got drawn into it emotionally and out of respect for my country. No hate intended. In fact i like Greek people. We shouldn't compete on each other. Jesus said love your neighbour like you love yourself.
@@aleksk4151 oh don't even think about it. I think everyone would get angry if people talked about their nation like that. I would act the same way. I didn't even see the original comment by the way so it doesn't really matter. Props to apologising as well.
@@ΡωμαϊκόνΠύρ Rums aren't really roman they are just Anatolian Greeks. Yes a part of them are indeed Romans but not all. In fact in Turkey we sometimes use the word Rum which means Roman for Greek people from Greece. It's really confusing.
@@ΡωμαϊκόνΠύρ the eastern Roman Empire did many bad tings to the other tribes in Anatolia, they mostly attacked Turkish tribes and most of there emperors were evil just like any empire at that time
@@GloryToTheUnitedStates6037 when the western Roman Empire was collapsing, the eastern Roman Empire really didn’t give a shit about them. They only wanted to be stronger than the western Roman Empire and in the 1200’s they begin to lose a lot of territory from the Turks from the tribe of Kayi tribe (which will become the Ottoman Empire) the byzantines did many cruel things to a lot of different people and their cultures, they allied with the mongol empire to do more destruction,the Byzantine empire is nothing but cruelness and evil. They weren’t even Roman they made themselves changed completely over the years.
@@ΡωμανόςΔ́Διογένης-θ6δ the government was the worst, they spreader the Black Death in the 1200’s in Anatolia and in europe, in the 1400’s the IRC’s killed half of europe
However but why is this historically incorrect term "Byzantine Empire" actually used? If anything, then this was the "Eastern Roman Empire", to its inhabitants as the "Roman Empire" or the "Empire of the Romans" and never the "Byzantine Empire". Because the term was unknown at the time and is an invention of later times. Byzantium was actually the ancient name of the city before the city was called Constantinople. So the term "Byzantine Empire" is completely wrong. The addition of "East" prevents confusion with ancient Rome. Because Eastern Roman Empire is actually also wrong but historically it is more correct than Byzantium! So historically correct is the main argument to not use Byzantine Empire because historians should use the most authentic terms possible. But that's not the only wrong term that is used by incompetent historians. It is a fact that, especially when it comes to translations, it happens again and again that historians all over the world use wrong translations into English. There are various other examples of this. For example, the designation of Russian Tsar Ivan as Terrible is based on an incorrect translation. Because the Russian term for this tsar Грозный (grozny) which in reality means strict was wrongly translated with the term terrible. Besides in German, the same wrong translation is also used with the wrong term schreckliche (terrible). By the way, since Polish is a Slavic language like Russian, this mistake is not made in Poland and the correct translation is used. Another example of an English mistranslation used by historians worldwide is the translation of the Polish term "Rzeczpospolita" as "Commonwealth". Because the correct translation would be the term "republic" for the the Polish state name "Rzeczpospolita". This incorrect translation actually falsifies historical reality by adding Polish- Lithuanian before the term "Commonwealth"". But such a term as a state name, which would be "polsko-litewska Rzeczpospolita" in Polish, never existed and such a term was never used. This wron term also falsifies historical reality, because through this term arises the fallacy that this state was a kind of legal basis for the equality and equal status of Poles and Lithuanians. But the Rzeczpospolita was not a kind of legal basis for the equality and equal status of Poles and Lithuanians. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Poles dominated all peoples of the empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were imperial ruling ethnic group. The Poles dominated the entire state! So also Lithuania. There was no equality whatsoever as the wrong term "common wealth" suggests. The purpose of this state was not the common wealth of Poles and Lithuanians, but primarily the wealth of the Polish nobility. The smart Polanders only feigned equality for the Lithuanians for a while, until they secured power throughout the Empire. The state was never called "polsko-litewska Rzeczpospolita" meaning Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in English. NEVER! But although this wrong name falsified historical reality this wrong translation with the historically wrong addition Polish-Lithuanian is used by historians worldwide, although it is actually complete nonsense. In fact, even the mistranslation with Holy Roman Empire is a falsification of historical reality. Because this multitude of German small states that only pro forma were the Holy Roman Realm were definitely not a state and not an empire in terms of a powerful state.
14:56 Justinian II becomes Emperor 15:24 Justinian II is overthrown 15:54 Justinian II returns to the throne No, your eyes are not deceiving you and it's not another guy with the same name. I suggest you look up the story. He was overthrown, he was paraded as a prisioner, had his entire nose cut as a final humilliation, and was exiled. Many years later, starting again from nothing, he built an army, rallied his old supporters, stormed Constantinople and took back the throne. Would be a great movie if properly handled IMHO, but perhaps Hollywood would fuck it up, so better leave it for the history books.
@@Larsonteevee It was the old times. To secure the throne for the Usurper, all connections to the previous Royal family had to be cut. Wives exiled, sons either blinded, castrated or killed to prevent an uprising & to secure legitimacy aswell
There is no Byzantine empire but only eastern Roman empire. The name Byzantine comes from Germans who were believing that they were continues with their Holy Roman empire! For people who know the history know who were the civilisations who could named Romans and in this group definitely can not be Germans......
Just spend a minute to appreciate the ancient Roman Historians who gave us such records to be able to narrate their history MONTH BY MONTH. Such an exceptional civilisation
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men).n
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men)..
I noticed that all the John emperors, at least to the fourth one, were pretty good at reclaiming territories and military campaigns. Pretty cool. Edit: there was a John V, and needless to say I'm disappointed Edit: apparently there were three more Johns, and none of them really lived up to the name John
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men) ...
*Roman Empire: Η Βασιλεία των Ρωμαίων is the Greek equivalent for the Latin Imperium Romanum, and the English Roman Empire. One should note that the Greek speaking Romans (as opposed to the modern Greeks) did not consider the Greek term Βασιλεύς (and the Arabic Malik) the equivalent of the Latin Rex, or German King, or Slavic Kralj, but that it represented the Emperor. They had always referred to the Imperator as the Βασιλεύς. It was used of the emperors of Antioch and Alexandria, and thus constituted the rank of Sovereign of Kings or Imperator. The Romans divided their empire into a West and East in the 3rd century to better control the Greek East and assuage the Hellenistic feelings for the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires of Antioch and Alexandria respectively. The empire of Palmyra that sprung up in the 3rd century had shown the Romans that sentiment still existed in the East for the Hellenistic empires. It was Constantine, the Western emperor, who united both East and West empires, and moved the common capital to the city of Byzantium which he renamed New Rome, and history called Constantinople (Constantine's City). Constantinople, New Rome, was the capital of the reunited Roman empire, which then divided up into East and West again after Constantine between his sons. It was united again under Theodosios and Justinian, and never did the Roman empire give up its name or its claim to the territories of the Roman empire in both East and West. No Western Roman emperor was ever recognised, meaning that Constantinople remained the single capital of the Roman empire until 1204 and then 1453.
THIS IS HOW AND WHY THE LATE ROMAN EMPIRE BECAME A GREEK EMPIRE: After 230s every free man of the empire became Roman,the name Hellene(greek)was synonymus to idolater and after Constantine the Great we stoped calling our selfs greeks(idolater)and called our self what we were Roman.A common misconception is that Hellene(greek) ment the nation of the Greeks,no in the Middle Ages Hellene meant everyone that worships the old religion and Roman meant the civilized Christian citizen of the Empire. There is the Early Pagan Roman Empire(27BC -330ΑD) and Late Roman Christian Empire(330D-1453AD),Τhis is how the Late Roman Empire became a Greek empire and how Greeks became Roman:In the 3rd century a.d. Rome wasnt the city it was the empire. The Roman empire started at 27B.C. and ended 1453A.D. the only difference is that the greek culture part survive and the latin culture part fell. Rome wasnt a city or the citizens of italy that spoke latin,Rome by then was the civilized world and Roman the civilized man. The reasons that the Greeks are the heirs of Constantine(who was half illyrian half Greek) are: 1. From 300ad Hellene(greek) was the idolater the pagan man that worships the idols so the proud Greek christians didnt call them selfs Greeks instead the called them selfs what they really where Romans( civilized Christian citizens of the Empire). 2. By 500ad all the romans in the west had gone extinct because the barbarians conqered them,the huns commit a genoside on the illyrians and thus the only Romans(civilized people) that now existed were the hellenized citizens of Eastern Rome(the barbarians gave to Emperor Zeno all the titles of the Western empire and recognised his authority over them and him as the only Roman Emperor and his state the only Roman Empire). 3. Up until the 640s the Empire had many nationalities Greeks,Lombards,Armenians,Assyrians,Egyptians and north Africans in Libya all these had 2 things in common they were predomently hellenized(spoke greek and had a greek culture) and all of them were and called them selfs Roman and not by any other name. After 640s and 50s Armenia,Syria,Palestine,Egypt were conquered and by 700 North Africa was finally taken by the muslims so the only Romans(civilized people)of the Empire that were not conqered were the Greeks. Who again didnt call them selfs Greeks because at that time and up until the 12th century Hellene was the pagan the idolater that worships the idols they called them selfs Ρωμαίοι(Romaioi,Romans)and the Greek language was called the Romaic language. 4. By 700A.D. Greeks were 90% of the population of the empire and from that point we can say that the Roman Empire basically became greek at everything(Culture,Language,Population)with only Greeks as its citizens. Again the Greeks called the selfs Romans their language Romaic and their state was the *Empire of the Romans*and the only difference it had from the age of Augustus and Constantine was that it had only one large nationallity instead of many nationalities the empire had before. Last but not least, the Greeks keep calling them selfs Ρωμαίοι(Romans) up until the 20th century and the Greeks that are now in Turkey are not called Yunan(greeks) but Rum(romans) by the Turkish state.Also language change over time the word rigas(ρηγας) equivalent to king was lost in time and only the term basileus stayed. Ancient Greeks,Medevial Greeks and Modern Greeks have differences because of time.
@@Georgios1821 I agree with much of what you are saying, but one must distinguish Greek language speakers and Greek nationality. Even before Alexander the Great the Greek language had penetrated deeply into Asia Minor and was the primary language of trade and communication between peoples. After Alexander's conquest of the East, the language was spread to the borders of India, and became the international language of communication and trade in the Eastern Mediterranean. Greek ethnicity and Greek nationalism were not an aspect that were promoted by or that benefitted the Greek speaking citizens of the Roman empire. Latin speakers were still a majority in Illyria and Dacia, although the southern Slavs replaced the Latins in Illyria. But this was the Roman empire, from East to West, the primary language of which continued to be Greek for trade and communication. The rise of Greek nationalism and the subsequent splitting of this into Greeks and Cypriots is the conscious propaganda effort of the West, because it benefits them. This propaganda really began to be felt in the Greek speaking lands of the Roman empire when the Western crusaders gained control of Constantinople in the 13th century. These new Western rulers did not recognise Constantinople as the capital of the Roman empire, as they had constantly referred to it as the Greek empire and its Greek speaking peoples as Greeks. The eventual overthrow of this Western kingdom of Constantinople and the retaking of the city was undertaken by successor states only within the Greek speaking parts of what had been the Roman empire. Thus, impetus was given to the identification of the Roman empire as the Greek empire and as the Greek state in its final years of decline and disappearance at the hands of the Turks. With the decline of Turkey in the 19th century, the West was very keen to not see a rebirth of the Eastern Roman Empire, and guided Greece away from Russian influence and into the orb of the West, giving the new state of Greece a German king. The creation of Greek nationalism was born through these efforts of the French and British, and then in the 20th century, the British created Cypriot nationalism in order to preserve its control of Cyprus as a military base. In other words, one can see the contradiction of calling the Greek speaking Romans "Greeks" to destroy their self awareness as Romans, but then to limit Greek nationalism from embracing all Greek speakers to call those Greeks speakers living in Cyprus Cypriots and not Greeks. This is just the workings of successful British and French propaganda, which presents itself as friendly to the "Greeks" as in the form of Lord Byron (as opposed to the "bad" Germans), but actually they are promoting their own Western political agenda, which requires the subjugation of the Greeks. When the French and British had control of Constantinople in the 20th century, they did not hand it over to their Greek Masonic friends, but handed it back to the secular Turks. In other words, even those Greeks who were members of the British Masonic organization were discarded in favour of secular Turks simply because they still had some connection with their Roman past. The West advances its agenda with bad cop Germans and good cop French-English, but it's the same Franco-Gothic civilization attempting to absorb the Roman empire into itself. Unfortunately, Modern Greeks have become the mental and cultural footstool of their Western rulers with only the word Byzantine to connect them to their Roman past, which is all but forgotten. Indeed, the word Byzantine is an indication of how the Roman empire has become nationalised into a medieval Greek state in the modern Greek Western European mind. While not true before 1204, it became increasingly a reality towards the end of 1453 as Western propaganda became officially accepted by Constantinople's leadership (such as the Unia) due to the dire situation of the city.
@@Josdamale I agree with you on many things,but Minor Asia was hellenized by the time of Christ,it's people not only spoke greek they had greek culture because hundreds of thousands of Greeks had moved from Greece to the core of Minor Asia and also from the coast.Another thing that we dont know is that after Alexander's death the nobility of the East was changed. Greeks replaced the old nobility and the new founded cities by Alexander and his successors were colonized by Greeks meaning that in the 3rd century BC the east was full of Greeks and subsequently full of Greek culture and that's why Greek culture survived in the East up until the 7th century.The Greeks of the Late Roman Empire after 330 and until 1204 called them self's only Roman because they were the only remaining heirs of Constantine and thats why only Greeks have a claim to Rome cause they were the only unconcerned Romans(civilized people)in the world after 1204 a renaissancewas experienced after the word Hellene became normal and started to gain ground again.The term Hellene didnt exist in the Middle ages, as only a adjective that can destroy your live cause in the Middle ages ment the idolater,the term Greece and Greeks changed in to Rhomania and Romans in the Middle ages. Greek's identity was changed after Constantine they were strong Christian people not some weak idolaters .So if you go back 1000 years ago the equivalent of Greece(Ελλάς) and Greeks(Έλλην) ,to us,was then Rhomania(Ρωμανία) and Romans(Ρωμαίοι).I absolutely agree with you that Greece is the victim of propaganda, because we were concerned by the Turks and we were for the most part illiterate for 400 years we took all of our history from the West and with having german kings for 150 years that as Germans preferred the ancient Greek culture from the medevial one we lost many things and only through our Church we retained some of our history and memories as Roman's.
@@Georgios1821 My friend, I'm just wanting you to see, because I know and understand the Greek mindset very well myself, there are many perspectives on the past, including the view at the time when it was the present, and then the views all through history until our day. Current Greek nationalism is not the equivalent of the Ρωμαίοι 1000 years ago. I wish people continued in the same mindset. But they don't. The word Greek does not replace Roman, nor does the word Byzantine express the historical truth. There has been a change of mindset in our day, and this, unfortunately, is why our Greek brothers don't call themselves Roman and they have forgotten about Constantinople. As one who would consider himself a Ρωμαίος, I can never forget this history, because it still lives in me. I'm sure you know this, but there were many nationalities in Asia Minor all through history, and the Greek language united them. St Basil the Great speaks of their local language in Cappadocia. There were Galatians, Isaurians, Armenians, Georgians, etc, etc. They became a single people with a single language but not under force, as their identity as Romans made them part of the same country whether they were Syrians or Copts, Latins, Slavs or Goths, for whom Greek was not their home language. These were all Romans, and they were still regarded as Romans when the empire lost control over those lands. Belisarios warns his soldiers to respect the local Latins because they are Romans too, and should not be confused with the Arian Goths. This is what it is to be a Ρωμαίος. It is to see that the Roman state has united the East and West, with greater respect shown to the Greek speaking East. Think of how many emperors did not have Greek as their first language. Yes, this changes, but even then you may find Armenians etc becoming emperors. The Roman empire must embrace all peoples who share the heritage, not just modern Greeks. As a Greek, you should see all these brotherly peoples as spiritual descendants of this common legacy. The more you nationalise the Roman empire, the less Roman it becomes, because Roman came to mean multi-ethnic. You can visit the Great Lavra on Mt Athos and standing in the church remember that when this floor was laid, the empire stretched from central Europe to central Middle East, from the Danube to the Euphrates. You must embrace the world inside your Romanism, because it is truly great and universal. No one can question the ascendancy of the Hellenistic language, but there are many other languages too within the Roman state especially Latin, Syrian, Coptic, Slavic, Gothic, etc. Indeed, we must ask why the modern Greeks are creating a modern Greek language, pushing it to become like a Western European language, instead of building up their historical language? With a little bit of effort they can speak Ρωμαϊκά. Build ties with other nations where you celebrate the common heritage of that Βασιλεία των Ρωμαίων. My personal belief is that everyone should learn Greek. Of course.
Byzantine term was crafted by westerners to differentiate Roman history split from Rome itself in the east. Taken from Byzantium. It has nothing to do with "Greek medieval history". Greeks were just one of the many ethnicities living under Roman rule.
@V C No, they didn't even exist in political terms back then as they called themselves "Romans". The main ethnic differentiation was between Romans and Barbarians which, in time, got absorbed into the Empire.
@V C language is a thing, ethnicity is another. It's like saying English is spoken everywhere in Europe, there are large british communities in France and Germany hence Britons are the dominant ethnicity in Europe. That's very far away from reality.
@V C not at all. There were Macedonians and many other peoples which started to speak a greek like tongue since Alexander's conquests. Greece has always had a rather small population and many of major cities in the Byzantine Empire, including Byzantium, boomed in population only when migrations kicked in.
@V C Macedonians were not Greeks and this is why the Macedonian Empire is so named and not Greek Empire by all historians. What is more important between culture or blood is debatable, regardless culture doesn't provide political dominion. I wouldn't say Americans are Englishmen just because they speak English. If you don't take into account culture's limits you may end up with a very inaccurate conclusion. They were not Greek by blood aside from a small portion of the Empire.
Roman Kingdom = Beginning of a great Saga. Roman Republic = The awesome Sequel. Roman Empire = The amazing Trilogy. Western Roman Empire = The Terrible Sequel. Eastern Roman Empire = A Good Spin-off. Holy Roman Empire = Bootleg Knock-off version.
I am Greek and I have to say that this Is THE BEST video on Byzantine empire I have ever watched. And although not at largest in 1019 the empire was very strong and there was an evolution of art, trading and science.
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men)..
@@Universal.. Never said something against you. But Albanians are deriving from late west Paeonians. Though Albanians and Armenians are the closest relatives of greeks existing (there were closer ones extinct).
@@g.kech.10 the gye mention 20 emperors and only Justinian was Emperor of the Eastern /Ronan Empire empire all the rest where in the west any way Greeks claime tge histor since Greek became the official Language of the Empire and nof before around d 600a.d
As a Greek, you should stop referring to it as "Byzantine Empire," since that was a derogatory term invented in the 1600s. They were Greek speaking Romans, that's it.
The Roman Empire lasted from April 21st, 753 BC with the founding of Rome to December 1475, when the Principality of Theodoro was sacked by the Ottomans. The Empire lasted 2,228 years, 4 months, and 21 days.
@Jordan Post I mean I get your point but you're haplessly mixing up 2 things. The empire lasted from 27bc which still makes for some incredible 1450 years. But as much as the Byzantine empire was the direct continuation of the Roman empire, you can't really mix up the cultures because from around 7th century the Eastern Roman Empire had little to do with Latin or Roman culture and was more of a continuation of Hellenistic culture.
@@PterarchosAeroporias525 Byzantion was an ancient Greek colony, on which the city of Constantinople was built. The founder of Byzantion, Byzas, was son of King Nisos of Megara.
@@PterarchosAeroporias525 the whole known world was under Roman rule at the time that didn’t stop them from keeping there national identity’s and that part of the world was mostly Greek, as Greeks and Romans have shared a very similar culture they respected each other, yes some Greek kingdoms went to war with the Romans, Macedonias, Spartans and others didn’t, Athenians chosen a more political approach. So you are a Greek, that I doubt very much if you are saying that Constantinople was never Greek?
@@PterarchosAeroporias525 I didn’t say your a Turk, just a Turk seed, which is worse, don’t matter where you come from, if your disputing the Greeks of Asia Minor your not worthy to be called Greek.
The name "Byzantine Empire" is not correct, it's given by historians centuries after it disappearance. The original and true name is Eastern Roman Empire or Greek-speaking Roman Empire.
@@MagisterMilitumBelisarius5365 I agree that calling the Roman Empire(what's left of it) Byzantine is wrong, but it's a historical convention by now and merely another example of how orientalism redefines the east (Greece).
@@MagisterMilitumBelisarius5365 As far as I know, Imperium Romanum hasn’t been used as an official name by any state since the death of Romolus Augustulus. Not to be confused with Romanoi. Which does not translate to Romanum. Or Romania, which does not translate to Imperium Romanum. Neither Romanoi or Romania were ever used within the western roman empire, and as far as I know, didn’t come to use until the 6th century AD.
It’s also Greek because the official language was Greek and the core of the Byzantine empire were the traditionally Greek-dominated territories. All the population was speaking Greek. After 1204, even the Byzantine court started identifying themselves as Greeks, to distance themselves further from the Latin European countries.
@@HEALER8484 The Roman Empire itself was a global empire and the term Roman was use as a nationality/identity of the people of the empire not their race. Greek was already a very popular language in the Republic times. Nonetheless yes the last Romans were greek speaking people and the last territories the empire held were mostly what today is modern Greece. Although one correction the court of Nicaea (the ones that re-take Constantinople/Nova Roma) tried to "distance" themselves from the west latins but when the Palaiologos the last dynasty of the Roman Empire got to power they basically washed away all of that and the last emperor remained as the last "Emperor and autocrat of the Romans". But yes it's Roman civilization history and Greeks themselves are part of such history. One thing doesn't change the other.
Verry good and ambitious video. Very pleased to see the Gothic War, the Arab Conquests and the fall of the Despotate of Morea finally portrayed accurately, so many videos get these wrong, but you nailed it. There's a few mistakes throughout the video I would like to point out though, as constructive criticism: -This is kind of a personal thing, but I think it would be better if you followed Wikipedia's guidelines for portraits, that being using the most contemporary ones. Stylized drawings may look more interesting, but they rarely emulate what the person (or in this instance Emperor) actually looked like and often look very wrong. -You mixed up Leo II and Zeno here for some reason. Leo II ruled for less than a year, whereas Zeno ruled for over a decade. -Nicaea and Ancyra are spelled wrong. -In the Sassanid and Arab sieges of Constantinople, both armies camped at Chalcedon during their sieges. It is odd that in your map none of them even reach Chalcedon, but instead end up near Bursa for some reason. -For Justinian II, Leo VI and Constantine X you use pictures of Jesus instead of pictures for the actual Emperors, very strange blunder. -For Irene of Athens you use a picture of Irene of Hungary, who lived 300 years later and was the wife of John II Komnenos -For Romanos IV you use a picture of Alexios Komnenos (not the famous one, but rather the sickly son of John II) -Naples and Amalfi weren't under Roman suzerainity for that long. Naples switched from Roman to Papal control in 763 and Amalfi in 958. -It's kind of odd you left out the Empire of Trebizond and the Despotate of Epirus, both of whom had as much legitimacy to the Roman name as Nicaea, atleast until 1261.
Concerning the images, I went through some issues because I did want to show the best image possible for each of those emperors. I didn't want to show coin images so I had to take somel liberties and look after portraits... Unfortunately, those portraits were those of Jesus...
@@KheyPard Well in that instance I still don't understand what happened with Justinian II and Leo VI, because both of these Emperors have surviving mosaic portraits. You even used Leo VI's mosaic from the Hagia Sophia, you just cropped Jesus' head instead of Leo VI. On another note, I don't understand the aversion to coins. If we're talking Anglo-Saxon or Arabic coins which show either a very unclear figure or nothing at all, I'd understand (although in those instances, I'd rather just leave it blank, there's nothing shameful about there being no contemporary image. I'd rather have no image than a wrong one). But most Byzantine coins have pretty decent portraits of the Emperors in question. Particularily those of Maurice and Phocas (which you didn't use) are very striking. Only in the 13th-14th Century do the coins get very poor in regards to portraits, but Mutinensis gr. 122 gives pretty good portraits for the Emperors of that time.
No :) İ just like a brave foe more than coward friend. Because their job was very hard. They were not fighting against strong crowded. They were fighting against a math, engineering master (2. Mehmet)
@@lyonvensa Be sure many Turks are aware that. Reality does not consist of the cheap lies of "formal history". Last Roman Emperor died with a sword in his hand. Respect. If you look through the "other side", you can see that the Byz had finished its era. Majority of the population was Turks on Eastern Roman lands, and they were people with strong "state-establishing". If Timurlane hadn't shaken the Ottomans, this conquest would have taken place in early 1400s.
It's called the Roman Empire, not Byzantine. The Byzantine never referred to themselves as "Byzantine" and even the enemies of the Eastern Roman Empire called them "Romans"
They did kind of gradually transition from a Roman Empire, the eastern half of the Roman Empire, a wholly Greek Empire, a very small Greek Empire, essentially just Greece and then a Greek City state.
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men)..
Byzantines language was Greek my friend Not Albanian , Illyrian, Turkish, Latin or anything else. With lies you cannot write history. Also most of the names of the Byzantine kings that you are writing are Greek. Tell me what Palaiologos means at your language and I will immediately accept that all of them where Albanians...
@@ΓραικοςΕλληνας Ναι, ο πρόγονός μου, του οποίου το όνομα έχω την τιμή να φέρω, ο Ιωάννης Γ' Δούκας Βατάτζης θεωρούσε όντως τους «Ρωμαίους» ως Έλληνες. Είχε μάλιστα το παρατσούκλι «Ο Πατέρας των Ελλήνων», και μια λατρεία του προσώπου του εξαπλώθηκε στην Ελλάδα, αλλά και στη Μικρά Ασία. Λέγεται μάλιστα ότι θαμμένος στην Κωνσταντινούπολη, τα λείψανά του φυλαγμένα από μοναχούς, περιμένουν υπομονετικά την επιστροφή των Ελλήνων στην πόλη.
I love that you let very clear in the description of the video that the "Byzantine Empire" wasn't a thing. That was always the Roman Empire. And the star of the Empire was 27 with Augustus (Constantine the great and Constantine XI were both direct successors of Augustus). The east side became the only part of the Roman Empire after 476.
@@ΡωμανόςΔ́Διογένης-θ6δ Thanks i appreciated it. I have seen one active debate you have in another comment. I don't want to take part in such fight so i just share my knowledge here with you. To be specific i have seen your debate in the comments about the religion topic about Catholics and Orthodox. I think you miss a couple of things like the fact that both were the same unique and first church. That such church exist before the conversion of the empire to Christianity and the fact that this church did have popes (thing that Catholics continue to have and Orthodox choose not to). Yes the Christians of the west (Catholics) gave their backs to the empire and choose the HRE as their new protector (yes, this Holy "Roman" Empire was neither of those things but was the best way for the church in the west to survive in the scenario that the real Roman Empire was unable to protect them) and the Eastern Christians did remain loyal to the empire but before such split neither Orthodox or Catholics was a thing just the unique and first church of Jesus with teachings in both latin and greek. My point is neither is worth of being called "heresy". One gave its back to the empire and one remained loyal that's it.
@@ΡωμανόςΔ́Διογένης-θ6δ Yeah i saw your debate and support you on everything but the religious topic since at the end the church of the west was alone after the Roman Empire lost the west and was unable to recover it. To some point what they did is logical in order to survive. And the east side remained loayl to the Roman Empire under the power of the emperor checking them. I just wanna add to your comment. But for the rest. It's always great to see people that knows and defend the historical truth.
Actually, the term Byzantine Empire (or empire in Byzantium) was used by contemporary German scholars to belittle the emperor of Constantinople in order to add legitimacy to their HRE. Also, there's the whole debate of Greeks not being Romans.
@@connormac4401 I know, I know it was used by the HRE. And I'm happy to see more people know about this. I mean the emperor of the HRE and the Roman Empire they even refused to call each other Roman Emperor. In the end, was very basic but effective propaganda by the HRE more than 100 years after the Roman Empire was defeat at the hands of the Ottomans (so it wasn't something so contemporary). And the last Romans were greek speaking Romans. Being Roman did star as a group/tribe term but evolved to be the nationality/identity of the free citizens of the Roman Empire without caring that much about race or ethnicity. And also according to the writings of Pompey even by the time of the republic the Roman Civilization was very Hellenized by the Greek City-states. In the end, the culture of the empire was Greco-Roman. Pagan or Christian but always Greco-Roman.
@@jesusaguilera6572 Nah his predecessors Constantine purple born, Romanos Lekapenos, Nikephoros phocus And John Tzimskes did that. He was just the zenith of a good dynasty.
There are a lot of things I want to comment on: 1- I didn't know Napoli was under byzantine rule until the 12th century with almost all of magna Grecia. 2- Philadelphia being alone surrounded by the turks for a long time. 3- even after losing everything the byzantine were still reclaiming lands which absolutely amazing. 4- the fact that it should be called "the empire that was being attacked from all sides" yet it lasted for more than 1500 years and being almost the personification of civilization. 5- how unlucky the empire is that only some incidents led to its fall 6- the 4th crusade paved a golden way for the ottomans to do whatever they want. And after 368 years of occupation greeks got their independence again. All the love to greeks 🇬🇷❤️🇬🇷❤️
@@cazwalt9013 agree! Assyrians were the first covilization of the world! (Mesopotamia was Assyrian you propably knew that) also "Assyrian homeland" isnt that big! So i dont think it will be hard to give them autonomy...
W-woah Khey you didn't have to put so much effort into a mapping video every year would be enough. In all seriousness this is out and away the best mapping video I've seen. I have no clue how you had the patience to research all of this or make 13000 frames worth of slides. And it didn't just take from previous videos, it shows so much new information such as the South Slavic lands still being de jure pieces of the empire, the Byzantine-Sassanid war in such detail and that it was always the Roman Empire, merely to the East of its earlier self. I must thank you dearly for this absolute masterpiece and hope this magnum opus of mapping can be seen far and wide!
I like how Sardinia just kinda fades away. Really does capture the way historians are unable to draw a line between "roman Sardinia" and "4 independent judicates."
@@sramanakarya Sir you’re saying an outdated narrative from 25 years ago, communications were not cut with the Arabic invasion of Sicily. That has been debunked since the 90s. •The Emperor sent an Orthodox Archbishop to the Island in the 850s who was installed by the Archon, •there was a Greek colony on the island which some historians say migrated there during the fall of Byzantine Carthage and the Iconoclast period. •Greek inscriptions have been found on multiple Sardinian churches dating to the 900s praising the patronage of the Archon who had Byzantine titles like Protospatharos, • In Constantine purpleborn’s de ceremonies written in 956, The Archon of Sardinia is listed among the Empire’s Italian vassals, and there’s a chapter about the chant sung by the Sardinian soldiers in the Palace guard. Etc Etc, while it’s unclear when they left Empire, with the cutoff point being the 2nd half of the 1000s, they were certainly still part of it in the 900s and the beginning of the 1000s still had the Archons speaking Greek, praising their position in the Empire. And yeah, Greek was prevalent among the Archon and Nobility until the early 12th century with a few Greek words entering the Sardinian language during this time. Although Modern historians agree they remained Western Rite Catholics and only used Latin in Church, but Byzantine rule and Greek colonists saw eastern Rite Saints and the practice of Icons/ use of eastern mosaics pop up on the island. 116 Morini “Therefore, as in the Roman duchy, the presence of Greek forms of monastic life (shadowy, yet documented) in Sardinia was without doubt due to phenom- ena of migration. First, the testimonies seem to undoubtedly refer to monastic Greek migration from Africa: Anastasius, disciple of Saint Maximus - we are in the 7th century, in the midst of the Monothelite crisis writes a theological letter from his exile in Crimea to the community (to Koinon) of the monks settled in Cagliari.48 Instead, the monastic migration witnessed by the three Lives of Saint Theodore the Studite (the whole of his hagiographical dossier) has its origin in Constantinople: a posthumous miracle of the saint, set in Sardinia, documents the presence on the island during the mid-9th century of an organized community of anti-Studite Greek monks, a party led (after the death of the Patriarch Methodius, 847) by another Sicilian, Gregory Asbestas of Syracuse.49 Another Greek monastic presence is witnessed by the burial epigraph of a nun called Graeca (Greek also by name!) which can be dated after 787 (by way of an indirect, yet erroneous mention of the 7th ecumenical council) and not later than the beginning of the next century (for paleographic reasons)” Sources: A Companion to Byzantine Italy: Chapter 3, Monastic life and it’s Institutions by Enrico Morini. Chapter 18 Byzantine Sardinia by Pier Giorgio Spanu. Byzantine Sardinia Between West And East Features of a Regional Culture by Salvatore Cosentino. A Companion to Sardinian History 500-1500: Chapter 7, The Sardinian Church by Raimondo Turtas. The Making of Medieval Sardinia: Chapter 1, A historical Introduction by Alex Metcalfe, Hervin Fernandez And Marco Muresu.
@@tylerellis9097 really? But how? Can you tell me, please, when and how the judicates became independent, if you want? (Because the history of Sardinia is very interesting for me but there is little information on the internet about the history of Sardinia)
The idea that Byzantium was terminally in decline is a huge misconception. Generally speaking, the Eastern Romans experienced growth over the course of 330-568, 786-1026, 1090-1143, 1154-1180, and 1212-1270; which is the majority of their reign.
Because when you say Romans, internet kids only think is Italy. That's why western historians created a new terminology to the Hellenic and hellenized east Roman empire
@@skylinelover9276 It's actually the result of thousands of years of propaganda. Charlemagne and every Emperor since styled themselves as the heirs of Rome - it was a huge thing to them, up until Napoleone really - and you couldn't very well be the heir of something that was still ongoing, then add the Pope and the schism, and there you get the Eastern Roman Empire usually getting the short end from the West.
I watched the whole thing. Best 56 minutes of my life. The music was fitting, it was detailed, you sir did one hell of a job. Also when you changed to 2020 at the end, it made me think, the only thing that could fix 2020 was the sudden rebirth of the roman empire
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men)..
@@densizdebiz3079 he wasn't black but interestingly according to William of Tyre he was nicknamed 'the Moor' by some because he had a darker complexion than usual.
@@The_Crimson_Lion the west and east were created at the same time. the east isnt the "second" roman empire anymore than the west is the " first" roman empire. if we are gonna use the terms first and second, then given that the east lasted MUCH longer, itd be more fitting to call the east the first roman empire and the west the second. in any case, the only legitimate what to call them is west and east. no such thing as first or second, or "byzantine", only east and west
@y e no, they were Romans. "Byzantine Empire" word is created 100 years ago. They called themselves as Romans. The truth is not East Roman too. It was Roman Empire who rulled east of the whole empire.
@@ΡωμανόςΔ́Διογένης-θ6δ the only thing HAHAHAHA ok. Religion and language are the two most important things in a population! What else do you want? And Byzantines lived in the area of ancient and Modern Greece so the romans as they called themselfes were Greeks without acknowiliging that. But their ethnicity was Greek since they spoke Greek and had the Greek religion. Stop this shit. The byzantine empire belongs to the Greek history not to the italian.
@@ΡωμανόςΔ́Διογένης-θ6δ Greek language became Part of the roman empire due to the invasion of Greece. But this doesnt make it a Roman thing. It still is Greek. Also what does connect a population? A place where they live together and a language with which they interact. But also a God or something that they whorship together. Am I right? And if you look at the area the Byzantine empire clearly is in the old Greeks land. The old religion of the Romans also came from the Greeks, they only changed the name of the Gods.
@@ΡωμανόςΔ́Διογένης-θ6δ nope. At the beginning of the Christinization in the Roman empire ,Greece was hardly affected. Big Parts of the East were allready Christians by themselfs (Greeks mostly) and rejected to accept Dodekaism though this was illegal. The Name Theodosius by the way is Greek Not latin. It means Godgiven. You see in Makedonia there was the first European-Greek christian community ever. And it was founded by Greeks. In Philippi Makedonia.
Next up: the Roman Civilization, every month. (509 BC to 1453 AD) Notable events: 509 BC: The founding of the Republic 345-272 BC: The unification of Italy 264-146 BC: Punic Wars 214-148 BC: Macedonian Wars 91-87 BC: The Social War 82-79 BC: Dictatorship of Sulla 73-71 BC: Spartacus' Revolt 73-63 BC: Pompey's Conquests 60-53 BC: The First Triumvirate 58-50 BC: Caesar's conquest of Gaul 49-45 BC: Caesar's Civil War 44 BC: Caesar is assassinated 43-42 BC: Liberators' Civil War 43-32 BC: Second Triumvirate 32-30 BC: War of Actium (Egypt annexation, Octavius' mastery) 27 BC: Octavius becomes Emperor 27 BC-180 AD: Pax Romana 193-235 AD: Severans (the beginning of the end) 235-284 AD: Crisis of the Third Century 270-275 AD: Aurelian reunification 286-305 AD: Division, Tetrarchy 305-324 AD: Civil War 313 AD: Legalization of Christianity 330 AD: Constantinople becomes the capital 380 AD: Christianity becomes the state church 395 AD: The final split 395-455 AD: Western chaos 451 AD: Aetius defeats Attila 457-61 AD: The Chad Majorian 476 AD: Odoacer becomes king of Italy 480 AD: Julius Nepos is murdered 533-55 AD: Justinian Reconquests 602-28 AD: The great Roman-Sassanid war 634-700 AD: The Arabs conquer Africa and the Levant 717 AD: Arab siege of Constantinople 754 AD: Losing Rome to the Papal State. 867 AD: The Macedonian dynasty begins 1018: The Bulgars are "slayed" by Basil II 1071: The Battle of Manzikert 1081-1180: The Komnenid Restoration 1204: The Sacking of Constantinople 1261: The restoration of the Roman Empire 1390: The fall of Philadelphia 1402: The Romans regain footing after the Turkish loss at Ankara 1439: The Romans join the Roman Catholic Church 1453: The Fall of Constantinople, the end of Rome.
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men) ...
All the respect to the Kommenid dynasty, they fought very hard to restore the unity of Greece and Anatolia and the survival of eastern christianity, but the internal strife, the constant betrayals, the military coups, the toxicity of religious circles triggered disasters like the massacre of latins and the fourth crusade, these situations made everything worse, the papacy acted with mala fide, the "franks" acted like hyaenas, venetians could have helped but they didn't, plus the insidious of attacks of the muslims hastened the work, arabs could be managed, but turks were a curse, the byzantine realm death was an execution by a thousand cuts.
They did but they brought one big problem in thier time u must be genius emperor like them to survive or u will be done just like the Anglos dynasty also manual wasted to much time and second crusade from 1147 ad to 1175 she should have focus only on Anatolia to kick the suljk turks out from Anatolia
I am not going to blame anyone for the Fourth Crusade except the Romans themselves, Andronikos I and Alexios IV needs to be rememebered as the worst cunts of Roman history because of the consequences of their action The Latins raping the city and the Ottomans reigning supreme was a direct consequence of choosing factionalism and petty self interest over the interests of all the Empire
Eastern Roman Empire: Correct✔️ Byzantine:False&Fake❌ The first use of the term "Byzantine" to label the later years of the Roman Empire was in 1557, 104 years after the empire's collapse, when the German historian Hieronymus Wolf published his work Corpus Historiæ Byzantinæ, a collection of historical sources.
The Illyrians 🇦🇱 contributed a lot to the Roman/Byzantine Empire 🦅 (Fearsome Warriors). Here is the list of Roman Emperors 🤴 of Illyrian origin (🇦🇱): - Justinian I - Justin I - Anastasius I - Marcianus - Valentinian II - Gratian - Valens - Valentinian I - Jovian - Constantius II - Constantine the Great - Maximianus "Herculius - Diocletian - Probus - Aurelian - Quintillus - Claudius II "Gothicus - Hostilianus - Decius Source: The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A.D. to the Third by Edward N. Luttwak, page 178, "high-grade cavalry (equites Illyriciani)" This region was late Romanized. It was famous for its excellent soldiers, frustrated but courageous. In Illyria (in the geographical sense) was indeed the most powerful of the Roman armies, in charge of watching over the Danube (nearly 12 legions, that is to say 130 000 men)..
@Türkiye Forever 1)Thessaloniki is not in Thrace 2) Thrace was Greek before Muslim population settled 3) Turkic tribes belong to Ural Mountains and Mongolia
I have always loved the Romans ever since my mom read to me history books when I was a toddler. The Eastern Roman Empire actually had 16 or more Armenian emperors and Armenians were the 2nd main ethnic group following the Greeks. If it wasn't for the plague and volcanic eruption that disrupted the global climate, I am pretty sure the Romans could have regained most of their former glory.
