The Seven Kings of Ancient Rome explained in Seven Minutes 

Yknow, had they agreed, the city wpuld probably be named after Mars, or something. Dual monarch style.

Abderrezak Ghozlane This comment is precious.

@@ntpgmr And then we would have Martian Empire. Do you really want this?

@@mixererunio1757 Nah, but if English would develop the same way then it would be like that.

That’s dark man

Areanyusernamesleft or inverted, you had hostillius tullus, which is strikingly close to hoster tully, father of catelyn, mother of Robb, the young wolf and king in the north!

KING IN DA NORF!

Well, Hostilius is probably just a label that they stuck onto his name afterwards to describe his nature.

@@daisybrain9423 What about Sextus. That rings a bell.

@Fatih Said Duran: Sorry, it doesn't. Care to elaborate?

bcause the uploader is a troller

If the Kings were alive today, they would be angry on how the world became too feminine

@@lovepeoplehu9883 I hope this is making fun of Camille Paglia.

@@lovepeoplehu9883 And you would bow down to them cause they're "alpha". Pathetic.

Mean n moody that's how they were.

:D Well said! Pyrrhus and Sulla are two of my favorites...Such epic lives

As Pyrrhus left Sicily for the last time, he turned back and said, “ what’s field we have left for the Romans and the Cathaginians!” - as a tear came to his eye.

You forgot the abandonment of Rome by the Plebians, forcing the creation the Tribune of the Plebs position. Also, you forgot the venerable Marius, and Scipio Africanus. As brilliant as Julius was, I think Africanus and Marius were better generals.

About to do a video on Ilipa - think you’re right - Scipio was a genius

Epimetheus Marius is one of my favorites

John Lemon the war he started against Alba Longa was over Alban sheep grazing on Roman fields. The war nearly annihilated both civilizations and came down to a combat trial between two trios of men - one Roman band of triplets, and one Alban band of triplets - and the last standing of the Roman brothers won only after both his brothers had been slain.

DISTurbedwaffle918 Lol... I guess he wasn't such a Nice Guy after all..

DISTurbedwaffle918 and do not forget that, soon after the trial, the Roman winner slained his sister too, for good measure.

/r/niceguys

Interestingly, the details about his warlike life are probably inferred from his name to begin with. The Romans thought his name sounded warlike too, so when they had nothing to work with, they decided that he waged a lot of wars and neglected the gods. There is really nothing we can genuinely say this fellow actually did.

Thank you Malay Archer! :D yeah I really love the ignored bits of history(or different perspectives on the prominent points too)-and I enjoy sharing parts I find interesting Glad you found my channel!

Great so see these history based channels grow, I've only just found this one today but I like it! I feel like the more collaboration between such channels can only help... Famine mentality doesn't help... There's so many interested viewers, it's just a matter of reaching the target audiences

Underrated? He has over 3 hundred thousand subs lol

KTChamberlain The problem is that there are no accounts of this period. Each king is reputed to have ruled a ridiculously long period, and all we know comes from the king hating republic. So basically an historical void.

It is because of probable revealing of Slavic origin of Romans.

This was a good video but it's important to keep in mind we have almost no reliable evidence about the Regal period. When the Gauls sacked Rome in 390 BC, almost all historical records were lost. What we think we know about Roman Kings is almost 100% legend. There are also many anachronisms in the stories; reading Livy's account gives you the impression that the Republic emerged almost fully formed following the exile of Tarquin the Proud. In reality it probably took many decades for traditional Republican institutions to develop. There were probably more than seven kings, as all their reigns are implausibly long. The stories about the Tarquins are probably a repressed memory of Etruscan domination of Rome, as there seems to have been a definite period where Etruscan influence is undeniable, just from the archeological record.

​@@desmondd1984 I guess we'll never know

I love it! Awesome video!

I think this style is greater than the previous one for two reasons, it's more detailed and also, it can be made as a signature of your channel instead of a generic style, and genuity is always convincing.

The people look to similar and very angry or weird. You can do better. The ladies while obviously too similar looked better.

mosaic style

I could not focus on the map. Like the traditional style rather than marbled

Well said

It's folklore/ oral tradition. Literally all of it might be made up. However, there is probably truth in some of it. It was their way of explaining what was before.

@pascal did you watch the history of Rome podcast?

@@jramseier There was some archeological evidence of the later kings such as the depiction of Servius Tullius in Vulci. What's really bizarre about the whole affair is how long they thought the kings ruled. For example, 150yrs passed between the birth snd death of the two Tarquins.

Yuwan it's ok, Reman Cyrodiil created an empire.

Nice reference.

So many what ifs

Alternative history: If Remus survived he would have established the city of Reme. Reme would first be allies with Rome and then 700 years later Rome would conquer the whole Europe, not giving anything to Reme, and then Reme would train their army and attack and destroy Rome, which would prevent Romans from killing Jesus, and Jesus would die as an 80 year old. Reme would also prevent Rome from burning the Great Library of Alexandria(the destruction of that library was a massive loss of knowledge,and it set back the progress of humanity for one thousand years), which is where all the knowledge was collected for milleniums, and now we would have that knowledge and we would be 1000 years ahead of our time.

@@mariojuric2871 How many people will misread this. The burning of the library of Alexandria destroyed 1000 years worth of knowledge, it didn't set us back 1000 years. Although I do agree that important discoveries contained in that library would've improved our tech a lot faster, but it would've only been about 50 years prior something.

Aweomse man! Glad you liked it I watch all your videos, especially liked your France video :) So cool you ran into my channel-Thanks!

The birds over Rome are way more interesting to watch than you would think. I used to think the Roman tradition of divination by observing birds (auspices) was completely random and absurd. Then I saw the way birds flock over Rome and it all made sense.

Or the Praetorian Guard

The Brutii suffered from Chronic Backstabbing Disorder. Then again, so did most Roman politicians.

The two Bruti of Roman history are actually related too. The Brutus who betrayed Caesar was a direct descendant of the Brutus who founded the Republic and threw out the Tarquins.

Caesar was no tyrant...if he had been he would have died old in his bed like Sulla and Emperor Augustus.

Dunno if you're just living up to your username, but he was most definitely a tyrant. Not all tyrants meet peaceful ends, and Caesar was most removed from a virtuous figure. Not a man to be glorified.

Larsanator Thanks! I appreciate that :)

That is a more accurate translation in English too! 'Proud' is too quaint a translation nowadays.

Same here. In polish we call him with adjactive "pyszny" What means man who is both proud and arrogant maybe also the bold

These were kings tho

@@temporaryaccount5698 same concept different title the same happen in the republican era some councilors were beaten to death for simple disagreement like the gracci brothers

@@temporaryaccount5698 If you think there's a palpable difference between a king and an emperor you're absolutely naive

@@boozecruiser different name

@@temporaryaccount5698 Emperors were one step ahead of kings. Another word for emperor was "King of Kings".

Lol

Seems they had a thing for bad boys, lol.

If you like it then should have put Remus on it

@@grinreaper. lmao

Vae Victis

French are descendants of Gaul's

“Gods I hate Gauls. My grandfather hated them too, even before they put out his eyes. Did you think I'd be out here on the frontier without good reason? Yes, Rome needs a strong frontier. No, Rome doesn't need unwashed barbarians at her gates! So, that's why I'm here, the leader of the Julii: to bring Roman order to stinking Gauls. Revenge? That'd be good too.”

@@imgonewiththewindfab uhh no, but sure go with whatever you like. No, I'm not a Frenchmen.

Emma Avelar it's just a myth, not really history.

Did you learn how to use your hands to speak? 🤌

Good luck!

What are you going to do after uni ?

EGO-IMPERIUM hopefully get a job hahaha

Hahaha I meant, what kind of job ? I learn history too, but I don't really know about my future

Most likely a myth...but Romulus at least is probably loosely based on a real historical leader... archeology supports the timing for the 8th century BC for Rome's establishment and rapid growth....at that time essentially all Italian cities had King's so it would make sense that a king founded this city in the 8th century, probably from Alba Longa too...after all their histories were destroyed, some of the oral traditions were probably embellished and made more epic with Gods intervening etc... So probably there was a real chap maybe even named Romulus from Alba Longa who founded the city...but maybe the brother, she-wolf and the vestal virgin etc...were made up Thanks, I was thinking the Romans loved mosaics so I tried to go for a mosaic look for the video :)

imho it is a myth but even more recent events get misreported to the nth degree such that the lie becomes the fact. Given that the Cloaca Maxima was the first structure in the foundation of Rome, and that it was built by Etruscans using Etruscan money; Rome was an Etruscan endeavor. The well founded Etruscans saw an opportunity on their southern border, drained a marsh that kept tribes living on the surrounding hills separate; and gave them farmland and a safe inland connection to the sea. Eventually the Etruscans over meddled to their doom.

Qwetery probably

The first 3 King were certainly fictional and perhaps the 4th. Rome didn't become urbanized until the middle of the 7th century BC.

founding figures have been mythical ,moses jesus muhammad

Darth Revan don't forget the mongols.

The goths, then the lombards invaded and conquered Italy, and after then the eastern roman empire sent Belisarius and he reconquered Italy for the empire again.

@@xiuhcoatl4830 ...Wow, thanks. I always see movies about Rome when it was in its full glory, but I never see anything about Rome from 476 AD to 1000 AD.

@@marcusrex77 because Its not a great period, and by that time Rome is no longer relevant.

@@xiuhcoatl4830 ... it may not have been great, but at least it put an end to the CRAZY Emporers and all of their deviant shenanigans. For example, I saw the mini-series, I Claudius. And I was shocked at what those Emperors and their assassin wives did.

considering the Levant had regressed to an illiterate state following the Bronze Age Collapse, with writing not appearing again till a few centuries after the time David would have lived, I don't see how they could have recorded any count they made. So this argues against the census story being true

@@keithharper32 Just because literature isn't present in the archaeological record doesn't mean that there weren't literate people. Writing as a tool did not disappear. Keep reading, you've got a LONG way to go before you can start making authoritative statements like that

Thanks!...I think I did have one then

I can answer that (Muslim here). The majority and I really mean MAJORITY of Actual Western European tribes/people (ancient and today) are descendants of Esau, older brother to the younger Jacob. The first son to Isaac, who is the 2nd son of Abraham (Ishmael is older by 14yrs born in 1999BC/3999); in a bigger picture, their lineage falls under "Shem" or Sam (In Arabic) second son of Noah/Nuh, but I'm sure you know that since your name states that and so does your question...Western European tribes started in Greece, that civilisation on the Crete island 3,900 years ago, give or take. Of course, this civilisation is "small and young" compared to the likes of Mesopotamia and Ancient Egyptian; but, it is nevertheless a civilisation. and that's where you get your Mycenaeans. Fast forward even further, after the collapse of the "1M" period, Greece was inhabited by the 'Dorians' and 'Sea People'. The Mycenaeans moved northwest where overtime after they moved to their new location, you'll hear people such as "Etruscans", "Sabines" and more appearing. What soon followed is the Romans, who are intermixture and descendants of those tribes I mentioned. The Romans eventually would give birth to more tribes of Western European, conquering the likes of Gauls (who is not the default ancestors of French people today, maybe some but not the majority) and others. Basically, the tribes that aren't Western are those that came down to mainland Europe via Scandinavia or through the Vistula. In simple terms, it must have nothing to do with any form of the Kurgan culture. Today, modern European anthropologists and genealogists cannot decipher where these tribes come from...the possibility of these tribes coming from the Pontic-Steppe has been debunked by the footprint of these tribes from various researchers, except those researchers that are Eastern European, they're still fighting today insisting that all Europeans are from that Steppe theory. You can see the bias-ness that they're playing here. Please, Please bear in mind, that I AM IN NO WAY SAYING THAT WESTERN EUROPEAN PEOPLE ARE DESCENDANTS OF ARABS. Before any of you that might comment on this post tells me I'm trying to push an Islamic "Agenda". I am not. Why? 1.Arabs are the descendants of Ishmael and that's that. 2.Islam wasn't even ordained to be revealed yet.

@@aizac91 good break down

I believe Chronicle of the Roman Republic 2003 I think that was my primary source for most of the info in this video

This seems to be a bit rushed. The real story is: Rome was a city they grew quite big and then were conquered/vassalized by the Etruscans. Who ruled for a few hundre years. Eventually the romans removed the etruscan kings from power and despised Depotism(kings) and never wanted them again. Leading to the start of the republic(after many attempts by the etruscans to reseat a king in Rome). Eventually the etruscans wound up in battles against greeks and were invaded by gauls, so they were weakended and rome took them on taking some of their territory and becoming a major player in the Italian Peninsula. The gauls then ended up sacking rome too.

Do you think you might be confusing republic(elected representatives) with a democracy Eric?

@@EpimetheusHistory Direct and representative democracies are merely different types of republics, with an oligarchy or even a tyranny or dictatorship still technically being republics, if a republic can be defined as any form of government without a monarchy, hereditary or otherwise. For instance, the US is a representative democracy, Switzerland is a direct democracy, and both can be called republics.

...and for that matter, are you assuming Athens, the chief example of a democracy, was a full direct democracy by 509 BC? Just look at the evolution of its constitution from Draco to Solon, and you will see that the city had a mixed system much like the Romans, with an aristocracy that had various oligarchic powers that only began to wane with Solon & finally disappeared during the Age of Pericles in the Classical period.

Daniel halo again

You're the guy whose always getting top comments from that ethnic channel. Nice seeing you here lol

C. Morgan Free nice to see you too