The Rise And Fall of The Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire Documentary) 

@MISERICORDI A In the west it's vice versa. But it pays to leave your own sacred ground once in a while.

Because it concerned mostly greek empire

@@panagiotisdouvris8738 your point? It's a part of Roman history all the same.

@@2manyIce what's up.

The Eastern Roman Empire is also the birthplace of Christianity so I think this makes Byzantine history awkward for western Europeans because they like to pretend Jesus is a blond haired/blue eyed German guy with no connection to this part of the world.

What about the russians third rome, the wierd spinoff?

Holy Roman Empire: Still in litigation over copyright infringement !

Holy Roman Empire was the TV adaptation that was popular for the first season but drops off hard after that

Holy Roman Empire: the Live action reboot.

So star wars? PT and OT were great. Sequels not so much

That would be too OP for the rest of the planet :D

@Vik D You mean the so called crusaders?

@@rolex1231 Europe was the most backward and rotten place on the Earth at that time but ok.

That's like saying only if America and Russia were allies. It doesn't work like that.

@@rolex1231 if only the romans would have focused on the west and Sassanians went east. Rome could have had all of Europe and the Sassanians all of India. China was also friendly with the Sassanians so tree way gang bang on the Mongols down the road. oh what things could have been. On a side note Russia the heirs to eastern Rome does to this day defend Iran the Heirs to the Sassanians.

Yes, and maybe if justin the second didn't war with persia and instead move troops in Italy and Spain, could be kepted

Retrospection is a bitch

Well that plague originated from all those useless expeditions he orchestrated! And most people seem to think he was a great emperor. What a disgrace!

Whatever the case may be, the demise of the majority of the Eastern Roman Empire can be attributed to their own ill treatment of the Christians in these lands who supported the Muslim conquests. Ultimately it was known that the Muslims were and would continue to be more just in their treatment of both Christians and Jews. The Eastern Roman Empire ended up being roughly equivalent to modern Turkey in size, rather than the entire east up until Persian territories.

@@yusufg.1281 At best it was a contributing factor, and IMO has been over-emphasized by thirty-plus-year-old scholarship. The more immediate cause of the collapse in the face of Arab invasions was war exhaustion after the disaster that was the usurper Phocas and the subsequent many years of campaigning against the Persians. Given a generation of peace to recover, things would have been very different, but in the end the Romans didn't have nearly enough time to rebuild before disaster struck. Even so, they held the line and eventually turned the tide decisively, ending the Arabs as an effective threat (unfortunate for them that the Turks showed up shortly thereafter).

It was popularly called Constantinople already during his life.It was just not official name-same as many othe unofficial names for that city.

And before that the city was called Byzantium, get it? Byzantine Empire?

@@magistermilitum1206 that is not the same city, Byzantiom was an ancient greek city state that Constantine Leveled for his new capital.

@@Zqppy before Constantinople it was called Byzantium, that's what I'm saying

Romans also named this city to StinPol. İstanbul name came from this name. Ottomans did not change city name, used old names like İstanbul, Konstantiniye etc. etc.

@Xaris Xeros Great stuff man.. Yeah i heard of Wanax too.. Fascinating.

@Xaris Xeros Thanks for passing the knowledge brother... also could i add there was such thing as a Tyrant... But researching it .. it appears it had much less negative cogitations then.. and was more of a dictator ruler than an evil oppressive tyrant as we think of today. Do you have any info on this? Btw my name is Antoniades, pleased to meet you.

Xaris Xeros, so Eastern Romans use the title "autokrator" as a part of their foreign policy to emphasize their "basileus" was the one who is the Roman imperator! I am trying to understand why they used "basileus kai autokrator" title package if basileus is sufficient and autokrator has negative connotation? Can you explain?

As I know the word tyrant got a negative connotation during the classical age of ancient Hellenes where people started to see tyrants as bad. However in the first times of Hellenes after dark ages, especially in the tyrant era of Archaic times, the word is only about one man's rule. Then in classical age, Aristo was considering it as the corrupted / bad category of one man's rule, which is opposite of monarchy, one man's good rule. One described as egoistical (tyranny), other described as common interest seeking rule (monarchy).

but the first time the greeks camed on the throne of the roman empire was in the 8th century.

did you expect deep research from some youtuber? Just enjoy the video for what it is: shallow entertainment

Actually, according to Socrates Scholasticus writing in the early 5th century, the city was renamed as "Constantinople" by Emperor Constantine himself. The term "New Rome" was only a designation of the city.

@@mithridates5399 and here you are consuming shallow entertainment while criticising it. Is your critique of someone who is trying to educate people a form of self-aggrandisement, or do you wish to get validation from strangers online, either way because it's a bit sad and pathetic, please stop.

The important thing is that it ceased to be called Byzantium, so the "Byzantine Empire" is a misnomer and an anachronism.

@@UnknownSend3r he is speaking the truth though. This is the history equivalent of junk food. Useless trivia and factoids.

@@MJayzStudio roman history was all about civil wars, It's the only way it went down

@@v44n7 Mhm, Greeks Always fought devastating civil wars since antiquity in every province they ruled

And unfortunatelly for the empire, civilization and Europe itself till maybe even today, they did! A great political and military leader Heraclius was! After the defeat in Yarmuk he never recovered mentally. It costed Him dearly. They say the same for Emmanuel Komnenos. Another trully great emperor after the defeat of Myriokefalon. He also had mental breakdown.

@@keziahdelaney8174 Ψηφίζουμε χρυσή αυγή για καλύτερο μέλλον Για χιλιάδες λόγους

@@user-rd7gm3fe1e Απογοητευτηκα! Λίγοι, και πολλά λάθη! Αδικαιολογητα. Το κόμμα ηθέλε σαρωτικές αλλαγές!

Typical way of helping from europeans

the eastern roman empire was European...

@@mariosmatzoros3553 I know. the whole "european knights" thing wasn't me trying to say they weren't european

Rasputin: Byzantium is my city

@@impaugjuldivmax Its not like the Romans hadn't spent the prior thousand years ransacking and plundering their lands or anything...

@Alexander Knight They always considered themselves Romans so I imagine they called it Rome as for all intents and purposes it was still technically Rome. Byzantine was just a made up name used by later historians to differentiate the Western and Eastern empires.

@Alexander Knight the citizens of this Empire called it IMPERIUM ROMANUM in Latin and BASILEIA ROMAION in Greek.

@Alexander Knight Rome. They are called Rum room today by the Turks.

Top 10 saddest anime deaths in history

Yea, this is the most dreadful crime scene ever and the culprits were the Serbian haters and forgoers of historical documents. One should mention, for example, the infamous Greek patriarch, Fothious, who kept himself busy transcribing some 280 Serbian books from Constantinople Library into Greek, destroying the originals in the process. They fabricated one huge chunk of history, calling it "the arrival of Slavic tribes in 7th century AD and latter". This fabrication was needed to cover up the fact that Serbian language was most widely used all over the peninsula since times immemorial.

Num num num

He died fighting in the streets probably.

The Marble Emperor. Cool name but mostly a sad story. look him up

According to myth the last emperor turned into a marble statue when Constantinople fell, waiting for the day to reclaim his capital.

@@lucifer-bear عندما يتحول الرخام الى انسان حي. عند إذن ربما تخرج القسطنطينيه عن سلطان المسلمين

They kept each other in power

@@rolex1231 Yes, as the Great Persian king, Darius said "Bros before hoes"

If the Greeks and Persians wouldn't have always killed each other for ages, they would have been the greateat empires to every exist

Dey wuz buttbuddiez.

@@rolex1231 that ain't a Persian quality, it's a human quality. Nationality is not as important as humanity.

ROMANSS

Thats their made-up name, The passionately referred to themselves as Romans and were still technically Roman

Yes i know very well they are indeed still romans, and i myself consider them as such, but i just use this name to be shorter in my sentences, in the end, we know what we are talking about.

@@DooTSweeT It ceased to be Roman after emperor Justinian. It was Roman only in name and after 10th century not even by name. Emperor barbarossa used to call them "Kingdom of the Greeks". The Germans had to invent the term Byzantine because the term Eastern Roman Empire could not apply to the empire during the Angeloi, Komnenoi, katakouzenoi, Laskarides or Palaiologoi dynasties.

@@TGeoMin The Germans had to invent the term Byzantine to solidify their own claim to the roman title. Just because others call them something else doesn't change the fact of what they are. They were romans and their state was the direct continuation of the imperial roman state until 1453.

There never was a Byzantine Empire.

@TheCrazyKid1381 sounds like someone is jealous of our beautiful pink complexion imo.

@@MJayzStudio racist

Probably Heraclius, in part because of the tragic nature of reign. He led multiple successful military campaigns and managed to hold the empire together during a time of immense crisis, only to have the Muslim conquests erupt near the end of his life and reverse much of the work he and his people had done.

Justinian, because of the Corpus Iuris Civilis and because it's considered by many historians as the last "roman" emperor. He had great plans for the Empire and for what was the former Western Roman Empire but after his death very few of them survived.

dont have a favourite emperor, but Belisarius is mabye one of my favourite figures in history, what a man.

Basil the Bulgar slayer, just sounds great

John II Komnenos. Overshadowed by his father Alexios I, but I often wonder how far he would've come if he didn't die young

It was about Byzantine, not Holy Roman. And no, it died long ago. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Lotta countries keep trying to "resurrect" it. Stupid. Leave it lying in its dust. Rome under Ceasar wouldn't have stood a chance against the contemporary Chinese Empire. Their numbers, tactics, leadership, weaponry, discipline and logistics were far superior. Even as Aurelius and the might of Rome, created the illusion of the Pax Romanus, the Roman would have been outclassed by literally any of the warlords vying with the eunuchs of the central court for control of the Han while simultaneously dealing with a massive peasant rebellion in numbers that would have dwarfed Roman population, and was largely confined to the eastern part of the Han.

@@thehellyousay Wow. No. Simply. Sory for being too lazy to explain everything but you are simply not right. Romans had established rule over realm with many subjects from varying coltures leanguages, religions. The economy, infrastrutcture and other spectrums of the human life were the highest in the human history for that time and before. And consider also the fact that the empire from a single city absurbate the whole known world to became the apegee of the helenic civilization.

@ॐ गणेश ॐ ha, where is the fun part?

@ॐ गणेश ॐ do you understand there will be no indians, chinese or africans on the face of the planet by the end of the century?

@@hulking_presence dude, we get it, you're a man of culture

@Kenneth Knoppik insert le : *cLiCk tHe bEll* meme - but that doesn't always works either

​@@thedoruk6324 Guys ive never clicked the bell notification Just subs (Yes ive been on youtube for a while since 2006) and ive never had a problem with subs and video notifications It seems this entire system is rigged

@@azmanabdula I know :/

@@thedoruk6324 Why are they doing this though? Control info?

@@azmanabdula Likely, also propogonate their 'own' channel

Verses funereal on the tomb of lord Basil the Bulgar-slayer and emperor (basileus). Other kings of old, other burial places for themselves ordained, But I, Basil, born to the purple, place my tomb on the site of Hebdomon and I sabbatize from the endless toils which I accepted in battles, and which I endured. For nobody saw my spear at rest, from when the King of Heavens called me autokrator of the earth and senior emperor. but remaining vigilant through the whole span of my life guarding the children of *New Rome * when I marched bravely to the West (Hesperia), and as far as the very frontiers of the East (Eos), settling countless trophies all over the earth. The Persians and Scythians (Bulgars) bear witness to this, and along with them the Abasgian, Ishmael, the Arab, the Iberian. And now, man, looking upon this tomb reward my campaigns with prayers.

It was popularly called Constantinople already during his life.It was just not official name-same as many othe unofficial names for that city.

Thats a common misunderstanding. It was never called nova roma.

Actually, according to Socrates Scholasticus writing in the early 5th century, the city was renamed as "Constantinople" by Emperor Constantine himself. The term "New Rome" was only a designation of the city.

Serbs werent the only pepole on the Balkans you know

@@RLDragonStrider what do you mean? Was there somebody else? Who?

@@hulking_presence Bulgarians? Yeah the Serbs were a force but Dushan's empire lasted only about 25 years and crumbled soon after he died. I dont even wanna mention how many of Serbian aristocrats were half Bulgarian at least, but I dont wanna sound like I am trying to one up, I am just stating fact. What you should mention is the Battle of Chernomen of In 1371 where a coaltion of Serbs and Bulgarians joined up to fight the Ottomans but at the infamous battle they lost...

@@hulking_presence lol your comment got me

@@RLDragonStrider Serbia was created in the year 491 AD in that time bulgarians where in asia my friend learn history, even the story about slavic migration to the balkan is a big propaganda, becouse Serbs were Roman emperors like Julius Cecar, Justinian, Probus, Constantine they were Serbs.

Belisarius was incredible comander

@@tonegrgic1620 and kourkuas

An intellectual!

Lol they’re my favorite one too behind the Mongols

thank you

Nguyen Thi Phuong Anh Online?

My favorite civ as well!

Andrea Gullo Cough Macedonian Dynasty.

@@tylerellis9097 in general yes but, ehehi the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom resisted against the powerful Han Dynasty of China, not bad! And Egypt was pretty cool during Ptolemaic Dynasty ;-) Byzantines instead are just...Depressing and boring (especially if we consider that they inhereited the memory of the Roman Empire).

Andrea Gullo The Byzantine Empire was literally the strongest nation again outside China on Earth from 940 to 1050. Look up John Tzimeskes.

Mmh...I dubt they were stronger than the Califfate :-/

Andrea Gullo which was a mere puppet state to surrounding Muslim powers at the time. The Strongest Muslim nation at the time was the Fatimid Caliphate who couldn’t defeat the Byzantines.

Thank you Anthony glad you enjoyed it :)

@Kayserili38ification Even sultan mehmet had a title kaiseri-rum which in turkish and persian means caesar of rome.

Relevant fact. Rome was Rome so it was called that. It's called evidence.

@@yusufg.1281 to your simple brain, sure, only rome can be rome. But this means denying sultanute of rum (a turkish sultanate created by the original, migrant oghuz turks (not modern day anatolian turks)) even exists

@@merothehero6359 Ya mama simple

@@merothehero6359 Rome was called Rome, this is a fact.

You cant judge Roman medieval society as "fanatical" in the same way as you cant say the same about medieval west.Apart from it being a huge simplification it is also disorted by standarts of our own time which are from significant level different from theirs standarts.

@@paprskomet Actually, I can say it was in some respects fanatical. I can also say 5th century Athens was more liberal than its counterpart, 5th century Sparta. One can say lots of things.

Thank you :) Glad you enjoyed

Lol you caths will excuse anuthing 😂😂

Rather than cry remember how good the Sultan Padishah was to Europeans who knelt before him, converted to Islam and enjoyed a luxurious life of silks, spices, perfumes and exotic slave girls!

@@AngryBitterNeckbeard you nihilistic fucks like to shit all over people's heritages over the internet

@@Daradajee Those lost souls may have enjoyed the spoils of this life but only earned damnation in the next. Orthodox now and ever yeet

Peter Roberts Empire Of Nicaea was shit once the Palaiologos got it anyways.

I feel you my friend but My Empire is sitll living in those who are STILL Orthodox Christians amen.

Romans.They did not seen themselves as Greeks as for their state and when they say Romans they meant The Romans not something else.

@@paprskomet If they didn't see themselves as Greeks we wouldn't have so many originals sources today where they were saying that they were Greeks and where others were calling them Greeks. Roman was a civic identity, not an ethnic one.

​@@gilpaubelid3780 Read Kadelis book on this.One of the most often abused theories is to try claiming that being a Roman was nothing more for them but political identity but that is a false claim and a huge oversimplification.It is really crazy how we have like milions(literally!)mentions of those "greeks" talking about themselves as about Romans(those Romans,not somene else who just happened to call themselves Romans but in reality thinking something else,like "greeks" behind that name)and yet modern guys rather focus on few mentions out of so many centuries where some of them refer themselves as greeks and do use this minority as if it was more important than majority doing this rather from nationalistic reasons in case of modern greeks or from politically biased reasons in case of westerners. For the absolute majority of time they firmly,consistently and proudly reffered themselves as Romans,with greek identity being applied on more significant level only after conquest of Constantinople when it was given also by shift in meanings of terminologies at that time.While "Roman" started to be view as a term for western Catholic Christian,"Greek" started to be viewed as a term for orthodox Christians of the Empire.But even at that point most common "Byzantines" continued to refer themselves simply as Romans and when westerner confronted them as being Greeks they protested.Greek selfidentification at the very last centuries of Empires existence was solely propagated by very small class among Byzantine intelectuals of that time and it is mostly this class on which modern greek nationalists desperately rely on,ignoring ocean because of a pond.But to make it even more complex and realistic-it is nonsensical to see them simply as Romans or Greeks.In fact for them those two identiies coexisted and were not in conflict.It is only modern people who often have propblem to understand that. Example?Ammianus Marcellinnus,a Greek historian with Latin name refers himself as Greek several times in his historical work yet at the same time there can be zero doubts that he fully considered himself a Roman at the same time which is also obvious from his writtings.And he was no exception but illustration of usual Roman citizen of that era.Even at the very end Constantine XI refers his people as "descendants of greeks and romans"as recorded by another "Byzantine" who was his close associate and was present at that final speech,George Sphrantzes.Last Roman Emperor with Latin name of Constantine reigning from the city whose oficial name was New Rome.

@@gilpaubelid3780 they were both, citizens of rome and greek ethnically

even during the glory days of rome most romans were not actually roman ethnically, they did after all keep extending citizenship to other people that lived in the empire

Thanks :)

it's very easy to say that something is inevitable when it's in the past, it happened after all and nothing can change that it already has happened but inevitable? nah not really, tons of things that could have changed the outcome of what happened to them. for example if the emperor hadnt tried to get the pope to help by sending an army over it probably would have gone a wee bit better that is after all how the crusades started and they for sure weakened the empire quite a bit especially that period when the crusaders just said fuck it and went for the eastern romans instead of the holy land or even just the nearby turks

@@goranpersson7726 The Pope always tired to find a way to kneecap the east, and if not him, a east-hating, western ruler would.

@@Dave102693 they didn't really have the east hate as much as more modern times as that devide is mainly because of the iron curtain. They hated that the east were the actual roman empire and it delegitimized their claim to the Roman empire and the Pope's power to handing said title out

Or about Dagestan.

@MISERICORDI A go read the ancient sources and then you can speak

Please!

@Dario Spirit Why that?

@Dario Spirit Better not I just want to know how it came into existens not what cruel monsters there may be.

If you use the dates that make the Byzantine empire shorter, the Holy Roman Empire (962-1806) was a little longer.

@@otisdylan9532 Which was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire.

Eastern Roman Empire"