The Opera browser is owned by Golden Brick Silk Road Equity Investment since 2016, which in turn is 100% owned by a combination of state owned Chinese enterprises. Under Chinese law, all Chinese companies are required to provide any information demanded by the government. So, no matter what privacy protections Opera my claim to provide, all user data can be obtained by the Chinese government. So, buyer beware.
Wouldn't the Chinese imperial system have to be considered an even more durable system of rule than Rome? Yes dynasties changed, but the imperial system remained. the consistencies of the chinese imperial system across the dynasties seem to be more significant than the differences, especially considering we don't distinguish roman imperial dynasties in this way
It's clear toldinstone does not have a great understanding of Chinese history. Basically all the points he made can be applied to China. Much like the Mediterranean Sea, China's vast coastline and Yellow / Yangtze Rivers made them exceptional traders. Much like the Imperial cult, Chinese philosophical ideals emphasised loyalty to the Emperor, and the continued study of Confucian classical texts helped preserve a unified elite Chinese culture for millennia. (it's also pretty unfair to lump Rome and the Byzantines as one continuous civilisation yet not do the same for the Chinese Dynasties, which would mean China both predated Rome by 100 years with the Qin unification in 206BC and outlived Rome for almost 500 years until the fall of the Qing in 1912.)
I've recently finished your first book. One thing that surprised me, in a good way, was how funny and witty it was. Maybe the jokes on YT flew all over my head, but I had more of a classic professorial impression of you. Very to the point and factual. I really enjoyed the read!
Great video, but I don't know if I'm the first one to point out that the title is a bit too clickbait-y, since the case against China wasn't really discussed at all. I think the point here is that, Rome *as a single continued polity* survived for millenia (longer than any Chinese dynasty), which I should agree. But we can also make the counter-argument that, some other aspects of ancient Chinese institutions* (or their direct descendants) survived to these days (longer than ancient Roman ones) and are still being actively practiced. *How “ancient”? -- around and after Confucius’ lifetime (c.551 - c.479 BC) -- around and before the reign of the Qin dynasty (221-206 BC), China's first unified empire To suggest some from my head: 1) the Chinese script [“traditional characters” nowadays] 2) classical Chinese languages and literature (their lore are deeply ingrained into and inseparable from modern Chinese languages, e.g. Mandarin & Cantonese) 3) political & intellectual philosophies, e.g. Confucianism, Taosim, Legalism 4) *the commonly imagined (albeit often disrupted) unity of the territorial/political/socio-cultural country “China”* For instance, the works of Confucius are literally older than the Christians’ Bible or the Muslims’ Quran, but quotations from them are still being read & studied (& hated) by school kids of modern China (& other Sinic countries). **EDIT: as a student of history from greater China, I must confess I haven't learn much about Roman history (yet). But I can give more examples about what I mean by the crazy longevity of ancient Chinese literature: - Quote a random passage (in it's original text) from Confucius; an average 16-y/o school kid can probably understand 40-80% of it. - From that text, you can find many, many words that are literally still being used daily. I really don't think you can find comparable examples for ancient Rome; i.e. I don't think an average (say,) Italian can read any Cicero in its original form. (🤔🤔I really don't know, maybe they can??)
Aren't the ones being mentioned too has its Roman counterparts? Especially the language and legal practice to it. Justinian's legal reforms are still the foundations for most Western spheres and more.
@@optimusprinceps3526 There are so few similarities between Roman and USA Government. Sure, they both have a thing called the Senate, but that's about it. Dig any deeper and the differences are vast in both a practical and theoretical sense.
@@QuantumHistorian The title of President is also a Roman one, seems it was a bit more than another Roman title, Governor. In the USA the first Continental Congress at first wanted to make George Washington, Imperator for life, in which he gracefully declined. Imagine if he hadn't ?
I've been a subscriber for a few years now and I'm glad you're getting more recognition and success. Thank you for such an awesome channel, keep up the great work!
I don't know what this means considering "China" is still around and still, in some ways, celebrates its past culture. Italy is still there, but the civilization known as Rome is gone, but the civilization known as "China" still exist and has been going strong for at least 5,000 years. Yes. the governmental system has changed, but the Chinese Civilization area still exists.
There’s a certain quality that while in all his videos is especially prominent here. Gives off a strong golden era of digital encyclopaedia / history channel (back when it was exactly that)
Great video. But FWIW I gave a thumbs up right after reading the title and realizing that you were including the Eastern (Byzantine) state in your definition of the Roman Empire.
I feel like if we treated the Roman Empire like any other empire it wouldn't have "lasted" so long, for example, you'd have a split between the early Kingdom, the Republic and the Empire, splits between various imperial dynasties, splits for the later German emperors, etc. If we judged, for example, Persia like we judged Rome you'd have a much longer standing empire there. Or Egypt as another example, where the priesthood provided the same kind of bureaucratic, political, and cultural through line similar to the roman aristocracy, if judged by the standards we judge Rome would absolutely blow Rome out of the water, but we instead split it up into numerous phases, etc.
Actually no, Persia was conquered many times during its existance, if a foreign force conquers your nation, its by all means a foreign rule and the native state is dissolved, Alexander conquered Persia in the 4th century bc and then the Hellenistic dinasties that succeded were not Persians at all, Rome kept their sovereignty all the way to the 13th century, with same laws, rulling systems and culture
Told in Stone is an awesome channel! Love their video’s. Also love the Roman history video’s from Saving History. My 2 favorite ancient history channels
Just listened to the history of rome podcast and am currently listening to the history of the byzantines as well, and was having this same thought. Luck definitely was a factor thinking back 😂
Rome may live on in many abstract ir philosophical ways, but China is still here. Still a nation, still powerful, and a direct continuation of that same civilization founded all those thousands of years ago. The Empire is not the nation, and even with all that aside the Chinese Imperial system was born before the Romans, and lasted centuries afterwards.
It's a shame you didn't mention anything about why individual Chinese dynasties never lasted as long as Rome, as the title would suggest. Cool video though 👍🏾
@@baneofbanesnot the same thing at all, he is not talking about dynasties ruling one empiree he is saying entire empires being created because of a new dynasty
The Chinese Empire lasted from 1600 BC- 1911 AD ( over 3511 years). The Roman Empire lasted 2153 years. The Chinese Empire lasted longer for almost a thousand years.
China wasn't a single empire from 1600 BC to 1911 AD. It was a series of distinct rising and falling empires, none of which individually lasted as long as Rome. This is why its important to make a distinction between a civilization and an empire. Chinese civilization lasted longer than Roman civilization, but no particular Chinese empire lasted longer than Rome.
@@Mbrace818 the 2153 year number is the most generous number for Rome that can be taken seriously. It includes the Roman kingdom, republic, empire, and the later Byzantine empire. The Rome at the end was vastly different than the Rome at the beginning in terms of a wide variety of variables. On the other hand, the Chinese imperial system existed virtually unchanged throughout the entire timespan. If you want to separate each major dynasty as a separate empire, then logically you’d have to do the same for Rome.
The three most important cities in western history in terms of their influence and legacy are without a doubt Jerusalem for the risen messiah, Athens for it's philosophy, and Rome for it's establishment of the idea of a nation beyond tribe, race, or locality. Between Christian ethics, Greek intellect, and Roman grandeur, it is no wonder why western civilization dominates the world.
The idea that Rome was raceblind has been debunked. And in the last days of both the western and eastern empire, it was reduced to its heartland. Italy in the West and Greece in the East.
Where is the comparison to China? Most of the arguments for Rome's longevity work for China, and if you consider the byzantines to be romans, I don't see any reasons to not treat the different chinese dynasties and the same chinese empire.
in 5000 years, if humans are still around, we will be seen as still part of the roman era - they'd call us now as something like the 'late Roman franchise'. Only when ALL economic, cultural, religious, aesthetic, architectural, social, legislative, and legal vestiges of Rome have gone can the future historians say we aren't that any more. And its shadow - positive and negative - has shaped everyone on this earth by its derivative effects more than any other civilization on earth by a magnitude.
the city of rome was founded around 753 BCE and the byzantine empire fell in 1453 CE, giving "rome" a lifespan of 2206 years. the chinese imperial system began with the founding of the xia dynasty around 2070 BCE and fell in 1912 with the emperor's abdication, giving the chinese imperial system a lifespan of 3982 years. it doesnt take a math degree to know that 3982 is a bigger number than 2206
if u base the two civilizations off of pure math, you are so simple-minded in regards to history of both, that you should exit this thread and go study more.
@@jyc313 this isn’t even a matter of understanding both civilizations at a deeper level. It’s a matter of which one lasted longer. Answering that question is something that cannot be done without math, and the 2nd grade level math at play here does not favor the Romans over the Chinese imperial system.
If you want to understand the matter, you have to first understand both civilization's cadence, progress of rule, fall, and dynastic changes. Simple math gives you the "lasted longer" only when you look at both as a civilization. The video states "empire". Rome as a society and civilization existed before it even became an "empire". And for some, China isn't considered one string of empire rule because of the way its civilization progressed. The debate people are having on this thread exists because it's not as simple as just saying "Ancient China lasted longer than Rome". If you stick to just the second grade math you speak of, then your understanding of the complexity surrounding topic also is about the 2nd grade level. @@bruhhda_mancakes3953
My main point of contention here is the date 1453 used to mark the end of Rome. If we use those parameters, China never stopped lol it just evolved. what about the Latin Empire? That was a clear point where the legit Byzantines lost control of Constantinople and only had a few principalities they terms empires and such 0:32
Just came across this "Priene Calendar Inscription" seems interesting. The documents align the provincial calendar with the Roman calendar, honouring Augustus by making the provincial year begin on his birthday. It refers to Augustus' birth using the term "gospel."
A question I've always had is why did Latin die as an everyday language while Greek endured. Both existed at roughly the same time, by similar people, in similar ways. I know Greek was the language of commerce at the time, but is that really all there is to it?
Because Latin evolved more due to being separated and split up into numerous Kingdoms. Meanwhile Greek has almost always been under one state with strong Academic institutions or had its historical regions taken by other groups like in Anatolia.
@@tylerellis9097 The Byzantines were conquered by the Ottomans. The Ottomans were primarily an arabic speaking country which left roughly 400 years to be assimilated. Normally once an area is conquered by arabs the language disappears (only exceptions that comes to mind is Coptic and Hebrew). On top of that the topography of Macedonia favors small city states rather than an overarching power. Ok fine let's assume that it was kept alive in Istanbul as a language for the academics, that still should have relegated it to a similar position as latin during the Renaissance. So unless modern Greek is much more different than the Greek Homer would have spoken (equally as different if not more so than modern Sardinian is to the Latin of the ancient Romans) I still cannot conceive of a significant reason as to why it endured more than Latin.
@@1TakoyakiStore Bruh, the Ottomans were a Turkish Empire that also used Persianized Turkish as a court language. And none of the Balkan territory they conquered was converted to Turkish Speaking, Anatolia was mostly converted already by Turkish migrations before them and still had significant Greek, Armenian, Assyrian and Georgian minorities with many Greek, Albanian and Slavic elites in government until the Genocides, population exchanges and sponsored Ultra state nationalism of modern Turkey. You cannot compare them to the Arab Caliphates and their successors that had 1200 years with interruptions to this day to convert the people of the middle east and Africa. Heck Iranians still speak Persian after all this time do to being able to maintain their culture under the Arabs and Persianizing the conquering turks but even then they have a significant minority of Turkish speaking Converted Persians in the northwest from 1000 years of Turkish rule.
When posing such a question we must first ask "did Rome actually last longer than China", and that's a very hard question to answer. By most metrics though I'd say "no". I think this video would have been better as just "why was the Roman Empire so durable/lastet so long" or something.
I'm surprised that the Romans didn't find another use for discarded amphorae. They seem like something that would have been crushed to be used used in roads and construction.
Luck is right. I am big into the Napoleonic Wars & my mate, a huge Roman fan, likes to brag about “1,000 year Empire vs a 10 year one.” But how would Rome have fared if full-powered versions of Carthage, Greece, Etruria, Egypt etc regularly formed coalitions to challenge the Empire?
If this is simply regarding the incarnations of the original Han Dynasty, alright, but if referring to the CONTINUATION of the Mandate of Heaven as both concept and possession, China did not disappear, it underwent a number of periods of serious internecine warfare occurred, but what about the year of four emperors? Hell broke loose. Also, how do we reconcile the various civil conflicts involving the first and second triumvirates respectively? The tetrarchy etc. Are we supposed to consider these points in time as NOT periods where Rome no longer operated as a unified entity as intended? But for China, yes, the Three Kingdoms period w my man Cao Cao's descendants et co and other political entities vying for supremacy over this mandate is there. The Tang Dynasty, which is viewed by many as the pinnacle of Dynastic Chinese history views the Cao Wei as a LEGIT imperial dynasty. Cao Wei only existed for about 46 years, but again, the reason for this is CONSOLIDATION. We then see the imperial Jin dynasty (SIMA JIN) from the 260s-420 and it is at that point we see the Sixteen Kindoms period and then Northern and Southern dynasties etc. Eventually we end up with succession of major imperial dynasties vying for control over all of what is now considered China. What I find interesting is how the Tang essentially recreated the territorial extent of the Han and then pushed beyond that for a few years, even taking Kabul FTR, I typed this before even watching just because these are legitimate points of contention among those in academia in both the "West" and China, and have been for as long as recorded history there exists. I don't simply mean MODERN ACADEMICS, but both modern and throughout history. For example, the Southern Song, I believe, rejected the Tang Dynasty's validation of Cao Wei as an imperial dynasty. This was HUNDREDS OF YEARS AFTER CAO WEI lol. That is how far back these matters have been contentious lol. Anyway. Love the work, and will now watch
@@jmgonzales7701It depends on the era and what measure of greatness you're going by. For example, the Eastern Romans were in a weak state around the same time that the Tang Dynasty had reached its height.
For those who don't get it, there was one continuous Roman Empire from about 14 BC with Augustus to 1453 with the fall of Constantinople. The Eastern Roman Empire wasn't legally a new country, simply the (often reorganized) provinces of the Roman Empire being overseen from an eastern court.
To be clear though for last half of Eastern Roman history it was just a bunch of small territories barely held together. Smaller than many feudal kingdoms, not much of an empire. Constantinople May have fallen in 1453 but the empire had been dead for some time.
Another thing, some would argue the Yuan Dynasty, even the Great Jin of Jurchen origin do not represent a continuation of imperial China, but this is not the case. The way the Ming Dynasty became such is by claiming the MANDATE OF HEAVAN from the Mongol Yuan after Khanbaliq-now Beijing was evacuated by the Emperor. Thus we get Hongwu the Great
Rome was in the right place, at the right time, with the right people. Looking at its history, it is easy to understand why the Romans thought fate itself was on their side. It sure looks from the outside looking in that the stars themselves aligned for Rome.
Where's the China part in this lmao? Rome lasted 1128 years, 753 BC - 337, 353-375, 378-395. Constantine XI was a Byzantine emperor lmao. Egypt (3150 BC - 526 BC; 2624 years) surpasses it by far and wide. This is just a Romaboo echo chamber.
Yeah this video was just romaphile clickbait. Why are the dynasties of Egypt, Persia, and China counted as seperate things while the constantly evolving government forms and dynasties of Rome are not? Treating Rome as if it was unique in its longevity while ignoring the fact that other empires also saw themselves as being a single continous state is very disingenuous.
For those who think "China" was one continuous empire with different "dynasties", this is wrong. Each "dynasty" means "a completely different empire." It would be like saying that there was one continuous state in Italy since the Roman conquest of Italy, and that subsequent local or foreign rulers were simply different dynasties. If that's too hard to grasp, a "dynasty" in the normal sense means "a ruling family." The way they use it to describe Chinese history means "a different state."
No it wasn’t lol, china is a civilization, not just a country, the ruler of china had to follow a civilizational mandate called the Mandate of Heaven to have legitimacy. Thesis who became the rulers were called son’s of Heaven, because they brought peace and prosperity to china. When they couldn’t that’s when someone new would rise up and over throw them. It wasn’t just a collapse like Rome because the Chinese never lost their identity unlike the Italians and the Greeks.
@@Trill-Is-Real China is not a civilization. It never was. It was part of a wider array of countries in East Asia, such as Japan, Korea, Vietnam, or even Tibet. China itself was frequently divided into different countries, and even Han and Tang China had independent countries next to them in what is today's PRC.
@@Nonamearisto china is a civilization since the dawn of civilization itself. They were one the first civilizations to ever exist on the face of the planet. To claim it wasn’t ridiculous nonsense. The country’s of japan, Korea and Vietnam in their various forms have recognized that for thousands of years. Most of the cultural that the other East Asian states even have comes mostly from China. They were considered barbarians by the Chinese at one point.
China is still around. Rome isn't. Italy is, but modern Italy is not a direct continuation of Rome. If we consider both the Roman Republic and Roman Empire as Rome, then China is still standing.
@@SithStudy Oh yes it is, not just remotely, but very closely. Like I said, it's a direct continuation of the dynasties that lasted until last century. Nothing about the old world. China had a direct dynastic lineage from 3000 years ago up until 1912. And then it was taken over by Chinese republicans. If Rome can con from monarchy to republic to empire and still be Rome, China is still China to this day.
@@SithStudy That is a very good point and one I raised to several of my Chinese friends too. I don't have any personal opinion on the matter, but I'll give you theirs. The reasoning goes that while *the north* of China became a part of the Mongol empire in the early 1200's, and the south decades later, the empire soon became fragmented, and Kublai Khan (one of Ghenghis' sons) took over the China + Mongolia part of the empire (which was no longer a single empire), adopting Chinese customs and renaming it Yuan. He took on Chinese names, language, clothing, and such. So modern Chinese historians do consider the interim period between as a conquest, but afterwards it's considered to be a dynasty led by a non-han ethnicity (much like the Qing dynasty, who were manchus), because that is how in fact the emperor pretended it to be. And then, after the Yuan, in some one hundred years, the Ming dynasty began, and so the dynastic lineage continued.
It depends on how you count continuity. If you count each dynasty change as one empire because they kept the Mandate of Heaven institutions, overall yeah. China only had some periods of fragmentation. Early 2 dynasties lasted very long time. After that, dynasties would be short lived in comparison, but the institutions would be left relatively intact. Even with foreigner control, usually it is still recognizable as China. However, if people count as each dynastic period being distinct, then China after the first two dynasties just look like it breaks and reforms a lot. People usually don't see Rome this way in terms of dynasty, so it feels like a long continuum even when their dynasties or generals/dictators fall. It is just a vast different system in the end. I'd say China is a contender. In terms of dynasty continuity, Zhou last 790 years. I don't see any Roman dynasty come close to this. Also, Roman Empire people will count Republican period till Byzantine. Some may add HRE and Ottoman Empire. In this case, it would be fair to count China since the Xia period till Qing.
ROMEABOOS AND THEIR CREATIVE INTERPRETATION OF FACTS.I think it takes a very generous interpretation of 'Roman Empire' to claim it lasted 1500 Years when it didn't last those 1500 years as any single contiguous entity for the majority. -- The Roman Empire, defined as originating from the conquest of the Mediterranean (i.e. Greece, Hispania, North Africa) dates to about 146 BCE and that lasted till 450s CE, so some 600 years. Which is impressive for sure, but all things considered it's in the general ballpark. -- The Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantine Empire being framed as essentially the same as the classical Roman empire and not a significantly reduced wing with territories permanently lost is wishful thinking rightly demolished by Adrian Goldsworthy. If it originated from the founding of Constantinople it lasted from 330 CE to 1204 CE as a single continuous entry, albeit it lost permanently territories in Egypt, Levant, Anatolia by then already. Pockets in Trebizond recovered the state which limped till the Ottomans put it out of a misery (in what was essentially a foregone conclusion). The Roman Empire seen clearly isn't an example for longevity at all.
The Founding Fathers modeled our Republic on the Roman Republic. They wrote the Constitution at at time of historic debt, historic inflation, and insurrections, and this was after surviving the American War for Independence. They thought about the question of succession, about successive generations degenerating because of the success of their fathers, and how civil wars settled disputes. They came up with our system. The constitution was made for hard times. It was written in harder times. Revolution and rebirth, once we declare independence from the Anglo-American Empire, based out of the City of London.
Another fact why Roman rule survived for so long: The wise use of engineering and technology for public works. Foreigners saw Roman culture and public management as superior and wanted to imitate it, even to the point of being voluntarily absorbed by it. Baths, aqueducts, roads, bridges, ports, giant amphitheatres and magnificent cities mesmerized anyone who came from wilder lands so Rome was the synonym for progress and perfectionism. But maybe that also draw the attention from sacking armies and waves of immigration, so it's like a two sided coin.
Byzantium is a separate Hellenic Empire and is not the contiuation of Roman Empire. The Roman Empire fell in 5th century, end of the story. If you count the Byzantine Empire "the Roman Empire", then you should also count the Ottoman Empire, they also called themselves Romans at Mehmed II's time.
Japan as a nation-state certainly did not exist until well after the beginning of current system for recording the passing of the years (the modern Common Era, abbreviated BCE and CE). The Jomon people came to Japan a very long time ago, but we know nothing about their language or political organization. The Yayoi people came to Japan about 400 BCE and brought rice agriculture but were not a single political state. According to Wikipedia ". . . the Yayoi tribes gradually coalesced into a number of kingdoms. In the earliest written work to unambiguously mention Japan, the Book of Han, published in 111 AD, states that one hundred kingdoms comprised Japan, which is referred to as Wa. A later Chinese work of history, the Book of Wei, states that by 240 AD, the powerful kingdom of Yamatai, ruled by the female monarch Himiko, had gained ascendancy over the others . . . " I am of the opinion this Yamatai kingdom is the first political arrangement to manage a large portion of modern Japan, but northern Honshu did not come under the control of the imperial/feudal system until the Nara period (700 CE) and Hokkaido not until the Edo period (1600 CE)
@@Ghiyath981 We are basically in agreement. The thesis of this video is that the Roman Empire existed for a very long time and may be the empire that lasted the longest. kaloarepo288 offers the "Japanese Empire" as a rival in durability, arguing that it started "a long time before BCE." I disagreed with that assessment stating that Japan as a nation-state did not come into existence until sometime during what is now called CE. You agree stating Japan has been around since 250CE. Wikipedia states Japan gradually became unified under. a central government between 300 and 900 CE, and I think that assessment is correct. So our assessments differ only by a hundred years or so. Now our debate turns to the definition of "empire" but I would argue that Japan was not have imperialistic ambitions until the Meiji period, beginning in 1860.
@@Ghiyath981 I would like to know how you define "empire" such that Japan has been an empire for 1774 years. In. my opinion, the first imperialistic effort was Hideyoshi's two failed attempts to subjugate Korea in the 1590s. This was followed by 200 years of isolationist policies by the Tokugawa shogunate (the Edo Period), and there were no further imperialistic ambitions until the Meiji Period.
This video really doesn’t touch on 4 important factors: who they conquered, their enemies demands, enemies, slavery+genealogy, & the society’s relationship with the state as a most necessary entity⬇️ For “states” conquered romans themselves were apart of the greater Hellenic sphere of influence that existed since the Sea people’s confederation. More specifically the rise of the Phoenicians, particularly at Tyre and it was the greeks who record Emperor Cadmus founded the dynasty of thebes as testament of their early influence. And on the reverse end, the phonecians absorbed many elements from Philisitines of Greece who settled near by and continuously shared ideas (though its mostly one sided🇱🇧) As one remembers, later after centuries of phonecian influence on the greeks, both would colonize huge parts of the Mediterranean (where the soon to be roman empire would reign) bringing with them shared influences. This would heightened via Alexander the Great, Hannibal Barca, & Massanisa (whose family was in contact w/ roman elites). The tribes conquered by Romans did not have a concept of nation states nor a national culture on top of a regional one. With brutal conquest and assimilation, they would become much harder to break away without a large cultural unit like Carthage or Egypt. This also applies to greek city states to an extant. They did have a regional culture but the romans were just an extension of the hellenic sphere since the beginning albeit barely. Compare this with the middle east’s diversity of more centralized yet culturally alien states. Rome’s enemies siphoned off the empire. Outside tribes wanted money. The Sassanids seeker legitimacy through the “romans paying taxes” to the king of kings. Nomads genuinely believed all states paying taxes were apart of their empire. However their concept of empire was akin to the phrase “community of the realm”. Geographically almost any break away state would be at the mercy of neighboring barbarians except italy and Spain. Another underrated reason was slavery. The romans practiced slavery at an unparalleled scale. When they were freed…who were they in the empire that enslaved them? ROMAN! Thus people identifying as roman grew and spread the idea through marriage to the point that one historian recounted that by the second century AD, any roman could account at least one slave in their geneology of a couple generations ago. Zoroastrian Persia, China, & India weren’t too big fans. Lastly was their worship of the state as opposed to just lineages compared to any neighbor. I mean the losses at the punic & Phyric wars would make any civilization pause in their tracks. But rome was fundamentally alien than the rest culturally speaking, more akin to China. Certainly not like other societies that placed clans below nobility and religion
Saying Rome outlasts China would be too ridiculous considering Chinese still speak and write Chinese while Latin is a dead language. I guess the title is purely a click bait and it worked.
@@SithStudy pronunciation changes, which is the case for almost every language, but the writing system doesn't change much. By every standard Chinese is not a dead language like Latin.
latin is a dead language in a sense that it evolved into the languages of spanish, italian, french and romanian. LOL same can apply to ancient chinese and the 8 different dialects spoken in china
The Romans gave engineering law, government literature abd we in the west inherited that culture gave like the Greeks before them and to bronze age powers before them these was the legacy of the Romans historical classical era and was why east and western Europe the Romans empire lasted so long from ancient Italy i believe came this greatist empire in history
Should change the title from "Why Rome Lasted Longer than China" to "China is the longest surviving nation and civilization on Earth but Roman legacy lasted even longer than Chinese legacy".
Modern historians are the kind of people, who if you show them a morphing video of a chair turning into a bench turning into a bed will then claim that a chair is a bed
@@arthurg.calixto3338 That's because Westerners don't want to admit that China was vastly greater than Rome. They are constantly swimming in double standards and hypocrisy.
Indeed, to this day, ships remain the most cost efficient way to distribute goods and resources around the world. I once read it costs more to get a bottle of Bordeaux across the dock in New York than it does to move it from France to North America by ship.
@@Fronzel41 Actually taxes might make a good way to define a nation state: Is there a central office that handles the accounting necessary to collect taxes and allocate the revenue? Our earliest written records are in fact accounting documents so our knowledge of the earliest empires depends on the bean counters.
Yeah, because we have giant floating warehouses with the capacity of 20.000 TEU now. Of course your shipping costs per bottle is almost cero if you're able to ship millions of them.
@@neonity4294 I think you miss the point. It makes no difference if you send one case or a hundred cases, the cost per bottle from France to North America, 5,500 km, is a few cents on the bottle. To move those same bottles from from the dock in New York to the shop in New York by truck (10s of kms) is easily twice the cost (per bottle) of getting them across the Atlantic. So yes, the greater carrying capacity of ships both in the era of imperial Rome and now makes loading stuff onto a ship and shipping it much more cost effective than loading it onto 500 horses or a diesel powered 500 horse power truck.
I enjoy your work please dont take ads for ai chatbots. It makes me question your reliability as a historical source when youre willing to endorse a source of information that obfuscates sources and just like. Lies due to its stupidity.
Thanks to Opera for sponsoring this video. Try the Opera browser FREE here: opr.as/Opera-browser-toldinstone
The Opera browser is owned by Golden Brick Silk Road Equity Investment since 2016, which in turn is 100% owned by a combination of state owned Chinese enterprises. Under Chinese law, all Chinese companies are required to provide any information demanded by the government. So, no matter what privacy protections Opera my claim to provide, all user data can be obtained by the Chinese government. So, buyer beware.
Can you tell them the ad-blocker is not working on your videos?
Wouldn't the Chinese imperial system have to be considered an even more durable system of rule than Rome? Yes dynasties changed, but the imperial system remained. the consistencies of the chinese imperial system across the dynasties seem to be more significant than the differences, especially considering we don't distinguish roman imperial dynasties in this way
Also Persia.
Yeah I do not see how Rome out Competes China here.
It has 1000 years over Persia though as an Empire.
It's clear toldinstone does not have a great understanding of Chinese history. Basically all the points he made can be applied to China. Much like the Mediterranean Sea, China's vast coastline and Yellow / Yangtze Rivers made them exceptional traders. Much like the Imperial cult, Chinese philosophical ideals emphasised loyalty to the Emperor, and the continued study of Confucian classical texts helped preserve a unified elite Chinese culture for millennia. (it's also pretty unfair to lump Rome and the Byzantines as one continuous civilisation yet not do the same for the Chinese Dynasties, which would mean China both predated Rome by 100 years with the Qin unification in 206BC and outlived Rome for almost 500 years until the fall of the Qing in 1912.)
@@doctorbobcat7123 yeah, and when I came back to view these replies, the title of the video was changed to specifically refer to China. Why?
@@cyanpunch6140because anti-China stuff goes over well with conservative rome history entertainment viewers
“While browsing lesser content” 😂 made my day man. I salute you 🫡
There's a special place in my heart for people who can deliver such sass with a straight face.
yeah that made me atually laugh out loud, I love it
@@QuantumHistorian The doc missed his calling as a comedian. He's great at being a deadpan straight man and delivering backhanded zingers.
Came here looking for this hahaha
Perfect 😀
I've recently finished your first book. One thing that surprised me, in a good way, was how funny and witty it was. Maybe the jokes on YT flew all over my head, but I had more of a classic professorial impression of you. Very to the point and factual. I really enjoyed the read!
Great video, but I don't know if I'm the first one to point out that
the title is a bit too clickbait-y, since the case against China wasn't really discussed at all.
I think the point here is that,
Rome *as a single continued polity* survived for millenia (longer than any Chinese dynasty), which I should agree.
But we can also make the counter-argument that,
some other aspects of ancient Chinese institutions* (or their direct descendants) survived to these days (longer than ancient Roman ones) and are still being actively practiced.
*How “ancient”?
-- around and after Confucius’ lifetime (c.551 - c.479 BC)
-- around and before the reign of the Qin dynasty (221-206 BC), China's first unified empire
To suggest some from my head:
1) the Chinese script [“traditional characters” nowadays]
2) classical Chinese languages and literature (their lore are deeply ingrained into and inseparable from modern Chinese languages, e.g. Mandarin & Cantonese)
3) political & intellectual philosophies, e.g. Confucianism, Taosim, Legalism
4) *the commonly imagined (albeit often disrupted) unity of the territorial/political/socio-cultural country “China”*
For instance, the works of Confucius are literally older than the Christians’ Bible or the Muslims’ Quran, but quotations from them are still being read & studied (& hated) by school kids of modern China (& other Sinic countries).
**EDIT: as a student of history from greater China, I must confess I haven't learn much about Roman history (yet). But I can give more examples about what I mean by the crazy longevity of ancient Chinese literature:
- Quote a random passage (in it's original text) from Confucius; an average 16-y/o school kid can probably understand 40-80% of it.
- From that text, you can find many, many words that are literally still being used daily.
I really don't think you can find comparable examples for ancient Rome; i.e. I don't think an average (say,) Italian can read any Cicero in its original form. (🤔🤔I really don't know, maybe they can??)
Aren't the ones being mentioned too has its Roman counterparts?
Especially the language and legal practice to it. Justinian's legal reforms are still the foundations for most Western spheres and more.
@@aldrinmilespartosa1578There's no argument that Roma is older than China.
Rome has been under foreign conquest most of the time.
@joerogue231 so.. does China.
China is the oldest surviving civilization
Rome is the oldest empire to be recorded.
@@aldrinmilespartosa1578 Rome isn't anywhere near the oldest Empire lol.
@joerogue231 not counting the "byzantine" that is.
Could you please do a video on ancient sleeping habits. (Beds/ bedrooms?, pjs, hygiene, sleep schedule, waking up, etc) ❤❤
Rome never died, it lives on in our hearts.
Especially since the USA is a Constitutional Republic based upon the laws, foundations, and principles of ancient Rome.🦅 As are many other nations
We mimic Rome's style of government and much more.
Deep.....
@@optimusprinceps3526 There are so few similarities between Roman and USA Government. Sure, they both have a thing called the Senate, but that's about it. Dig any deeper and the differences are vast in both a practical and theoretical sense.
@@QuantumHistorian The title of President is also a Roman one, seems it was a bit more than another Roman title, Governor. In the USA the first Continental Congress at first wanted to make George Washington, Imperator for life, in which he gracefully declined. Imagine if he hadn't ?
I've been a subscriber for a few years now and I'm glad you're getting more recognition and success. Thank you for such an awesome channel, keep up the great work!
*you.
I don't know what this means considering "China" is still around and still, in some ways, celebrates its past culture. Italy is still there, but the civilization known as Rome is gone, but the civilization known as "China" still exist and has been going strong for at least 5,000 years. Yes. the governmental system has changed, but the Chinese Civilization area still exists.
The imperial system basically ended in 1912 though
China is our word for it
The true Chinese died out a long time ago
@@brandonquezada9523 Yes, but it is still the same civilization, they just simply changed their political system.
This is gonna be one of those vids that gets you more subs than anticipated
There’s a certain quality that while in all his videos is especially prominent here. Gives off a strong golden era of digital encyclopaedia / history channel (back when it was exactly that)
Great video. But FWIW I gave a thumbs up right after reading the title and realizing that you were including the Eastern (Byzantine) state in your definition of the Roman Empire.
Anything else is western lies
Another wonderful trip through time, thanks for the memories....... 👍🌿🙂🌿
I feel like if we treated the Roman Empire like any other empire it wouldn't have "lasted" so long, for example, you'd have a split between the early Kingdom, the Republic and the Empire, splits between various imperial dynasties, splits for the later German emperors, etc. If we judged, for example, Persia like we judged Rome you'd have a much longer standing empire there. Or Egypt as another example, where the priesthood provided the same kind of bureaucratic, political, and cultural through line similar to the roman aristocracy, if judged by the standards we judge Rome would absolutely blow Rome out of the water, but we instead split it up into numerous phases, etc.
Even if unified Rome doesn't overlast China, Egypt or Persia at all imagine if we simply separated them by Republic and Empire 😂
Yes but if you were Rome-centric & wanting a clickbait title, why not diss the Chinese (for the millionth time)…?
Actually no, Persia was conquered many times during its existance, if a foreign force conquers your nation, its by all means a foreign rule and the native state is dissolved, Alexander conquered Persia in the 4th century bc and then the Hellenistic dinasties that succeded were not Persians at all, Rome kept their sovereignty all the way to the 13th century, with same laws, rulling systems and culture
Just say you dont understand ancient rome, is easier than writing this whole lot of nothing
@@cristhianramirez6939 Welcome to 4 months ago
I would love to know your sources. You have such beautifully curated videos, they would provide great jumping-off points for additional research.
Camping in beautiful places and doing long routes that are necessary that hard is a nice way to spend a weekend.
Told in Stone is an awesome channel! Love their video’s. Also love the Roman history video’s from Saving History. My 2 favorite ancient history channels
The echo chamber of the Romaboos.
Just listened to the history of rome podcast and am currently listening to the history of the byzantines as well, and was having this same thought. Luck definitely was a factor thinking back 😂
In a cultural sense the Roman Empire still very much exists.
Thanks to toldinstone for uploading this video
Trade is still more efficient over water
Rome may live on in many abstract ir philosophical ways, but China is still here. Still a nation, still powerful, and a direct continuation of that same civilization founded all those thousands of years ago. The Empire is not the nation, and even with all that aside the Chinese Imperial system was born before the Romans, and lasted centuries afterwards.
Thanks!
Beautifully written.....thanks....
China is still there, with pretty much the same territory, and still pretty Confucian.
It's a shame you didn't mention anything about why individual Chinese dynasties never lasted as long as Rome, as the title would suggest. Cool video though 👍🏾
Tbf over its course the Roman Empire had multiple dynasties as well.
@@baneofbanesnot the same thing at all, he is not talking about dynasties ruling one empiree he is saying entire empires being created because of a new dynasty
did he change the title of the video? i know he mentioned china at the start, but the title doesn't mention china (anymore)
@@I_Am_Wasabi_Man yeah he changed, it it was why Rome lasted longer than China
The Chinese Empire lasted from 1600 BC- 1911 AD ( over 3511 years). The Roman Empire lasted 2153 years. The Chinese Empire lasted longer for almost a thousand years.
China wasn't a single empire from 1600 BC to 1911 AD. It was a series of distinct rising and falling empires, none of which individually lasted as long as Rome.
This is why its important to make a distinction between a civilization and an empire. Chinese civilization lasted longer than Roman civilization, but no particular Chinese empire lasted longer than Rome.
@@Mbrace818 the 2153 year number is the most generous number for Rome that can be taken seriously. It includes the Roman kingdom, republic, empire, and the later Byzantine empire. The Rome at the end was vastly different than the Rome at the beginning in terms of a wide variety of variables. On the other hand, the Chinese imperial system existed virtually unchanged throughout the entire timespan. If you want to separate each major dynasty as a separate empire, then logically you’d have to do the same for Rome.
@@bruhhda_mancakes3953 Single political entity ≠ civilization
The three most important cities in western history in terms of their influence and legacy are without a doubt Jerusalem for the risen messiah, Athens for it's philosophy, and Rome for it's establishment of the idea of a nation beyond tribe, race, or locality. Between Christian ethics, Greek intellect, and Roman grandeur, it is no wonder why western civilization dominates the world.
The idea that Rome was raceblind has been debunked.
And in the last days of both the western and eastern empire, it was reduced to its heartland. Italy in the West and Greece in the East.
Where is the comparison to China? Most of the arguments for Rome's longevity work for China, and if you consider the byzantines to be romans, I don't see any reasons to not treat the different chinese dynasties and the same chinese empire.
Because you dont understand how both societies worked
¡Hooray new Toldinstone! Do more videos on coins. I love Classical Numismatics, but he sometimes gets facts incorrect. God love him though :)
in 5000 years, if humans are still around, we will be seen as still part of the roman era - they'd call us now as something like the 'late Roman franchise'. Only when ALL economic, cultural, religious, aesthetic, architectural, social, legislative, and legal vestiges of Rome have gone can the future historians say we aren't that any more. And its shadow - positive and negative - has shaped everyone on this earth by its derivative effects more than any other civilization on earth by a magnitude.
the city of rome was founded around 753 BCE and the byzantine empire fell in 1453 CE, giving "rome" a lifespan of 2206 years. the chinese imperial system began with the founding of the xia dynasty around 2070 BCE and fell in 1912 with the emperor's abdication, giving the chinese imperial system a lifespan of 3982 years. it doesnt take a math degree to know that 3982 is a bigger number than 2206
if u base the two civilizations off of pure math, you are so simple-minded in regards to history of both, that you should exit this thread and go study more.
@@jyc313 this isn’t even a matter of understanding both civilizations at a deeper level. It’s a matter of which one lasted longer. Answering that question is something that cannot be done without math, and the 2nd grade level math at play here does not favor the Romans over the Chinese imperial system.
If you want to understand the matter, you have to first understand both civilization's cadence, progress of rule, fall, and dynastic changes. Simple math gives you the "lasted longer" only when you look at both as a civilization. The video states "empire". Rome as a society and civilization existed before it even became an "empire". And for some, China isn't considered one string of empire rule because of the way its civilization progressed. The debate people are having on this thread exists because it's not as simple as just saying "Ancient China lasted longer than Rome".
If you stick to just the second grade math you speak of, then your understanding of the complexity surrounding topic also is about the 2nd grade level.
@@bruhhda_mancakes3953
thank you for the video
Mate love the content. Keep it up :)
My main point of contention here is the date 1453 used to mark the end of Rome. If we use those parameters, China never stopped lol it just evolved. what about the Latin Empire? That was a clear point where the legit Byzantines lost control of Constantinople and only had a few principalities they terms empires and such 0:32
Just came across this "Priene Calendar Inscription" seems interesting. The documents align the provincial calendar with the Roman calendar, honouring Augustus by making the provincial year begin on his birthday. It refers to Augustus' birth using the term "gospel."
A question I've always had is why did Latin die as an everyday language while Greek endured. Both existed at roughly the same time, by similar people, in similar ways. I know Greek was the language of commerce at the time, but is that really all there is to it?
Because Latin evolved more due to being separated and split up into numerous Kingdoms. Meanwhile Greek has almost always been under one state with strong Academic institutions or had its historical regions taken by other groups like in Anatolia.
@@tylerellis9097 The Byzantines were conquered by the Ottomans. The Ottomans were primarily an arabic speaking country which left roughly 400 years to be assimilated. Normally once an area is conquered by arabs the language disappears (only exceptions that comes to mind is Coptic and Hebrew). On top of that the topography of Macedonia favors small city states rather than an overarching power. Ok fine let's assume that it was kept alive in Istanbul as a language for the academics, that still should have relegated it to a similar position as latin during the Renaissance. So unless modern Greek is much more different than the Greek Homer would have spoken (equally as different if not more so than modern Sardinian is to the Latin of the ancient Romans) I still cannot conceive of a significant reason as to why it endured more than Latin.
@@1TakoyakiStore Bruh, the Ottomans were a Turkish Empire that also used Persianized Turkish as a court language. And none of the Balkan territory they conquered was converted to Turkish Speaking, Anatolia was mostly converted already by Turkish migrations before them and still had significant Greek, Armenian, Assyrian and Georgian minorities with many Greek, Albanian and Slavic elites in government until the Genocides, population exchanges and sponsored Ultra state nationalism of modern Turkey.
You cannot compare them to the Arab Caliphates and their successors that had 1200 years with interruptions to this day to convert the people of the middle east and Africa. Heck Iranians still speak Persian after all this time do to being able to maintain their culture under the Arabs and Persianizing the conquering turks but even then they have a significant minority of Turkish speaking Converted Persians in the northwest from 1000 years of Turkish rule.
@@tylerellis9097 Is the difference between Koine Greek and modern Greek more or less different than Vulgar Latin is to Neo-Latin?
@@tylerellis9097 There were no significant Armenians, Georgians, Assyrians lmao in Anatolia.
What are we defining an empire as here??
When posing such a question we must first ask "did Rome actually last longer than China", and that's a very hard question to answer. By most metrics though I'd say "no".
I think this video would have been better as just "why was the Roman Empire so durable/lastet so long" or something.
Thabk you for your work!!
the city of rome is still thriving, and the culture and language of the romans is now at the forefront of humanity. amazing
I'm surprised that the Romans didn't find another use for discarded amphorae. They seem like something that would have been crushed to be used used in roads and construction.
it wasn't an empire by 200BC, and it wasn't Rome by 1200AD.
With so much clickbait and title questions…
I appreciate anyone who answers the question first.
👍
Luck is right. I am big into the Napoleonic Wars & my mate, a huge Roman fan, likes to brag about “1,000 year Empire vs a 10 year one.” But how would Rome have fared if full-powered versions of Carthage, Greece, Etruria, Egypt etc regularly formed coalitions to challenge the Empire?
If this is simply regarding the incarnations of the original Han Dynasty, alright, but if referring to the CONTINUATION of the Mandate of Heaven as both concept and possession, China did not disappear, it underwent a number of periods of serious internecine warfare occurred, but what about the year of four emperors? Hell broke loose. Also, how do we reconcile the various civil conflicts involving the first and second triumvirates respectively? The tetrarchy etc. Are we supposed to consider these points in time as NOT periods where Rome no longer operated as a unified entity as intended?
But for China, yes, the Three Kingdoms period w my man Cao Cao's descendants et co and other political entities vying for supremacy over this mandate is there. The Tang Dynasty, which is viewed by many as the pinnacle of Dynastic Chinese history views the Cao Wei as a LEGIT imperial dynasty. Cao Wei only existed for about 46 years, but again, the reason for this is CONSOLIDATION. We then see the imperial Jin dynasty (SIMA JIN) from the 260s-420 and it is at that point we see the Sixteen Kindoms period and then Northern and Southern dynasties etc. Eventually we end up with succession of major imperial dynasties vying for control over all of what is now considered China. What I find interesting is how the Tang essentially recreated the territorial extent of the Han and then pushed beyond that for a few years, even taking Kabul
FTR, I typed this before even watching just because these are legitimate points of contention among those in academia in both the "West" and China, and have been for as long as recorded history there exists. I don't simply mean MODERN ACADEMICS, but both modern and throughout history. For example, the Southern Song, I believe, rejected the Tang Dynasty's validation of Cao Wei as an imperial dynasty. This was HUNDREDS OF YEARS AFTER CAO WEI lol. That is how far back these matters have been contentious lol. Anyway. Love the work, and will now watch
I would love to see a comparison of Rome and China.
China = yellow
rome was greater than china
@@jmgonzales7701 Maybe.
@@jmgonzales7701It depends on the era and what measure of greatness you're going by. For example, the Eastern Romans were in a weak state around the same time that the Tang Dynasty had reached its height.
@jmgonzales7701 When you learnt history at Walmart.
For those who don't get it, there was one continuous Roman Empire from about 14 BC with Augustus to 1453 with the fall of Constantinople. The Eastern Roman Empire wasn't legally a new country, simply the (often reorganized) provinces of the Roman Empire being overseen from an eastern court.
To be clear though for last half of Eastern Roman history it was just a bunch of small territories barely held together. Smaller than many feudal kingdoms, not much of an empire. Constantinople May have fallen in 1453 but the empire had been dead for some time.
1204 was the real fall
It was still a Regional often Great Power Empire until 1204AD.
Another thing, some would argue the Yuan Dynasty, even the Great Jin of Jurchen origin do not represent a continuation of imperial China, but this is not the case. The way the Ming Dynasty became such is by claiming the MANDATE OF HEAVAN from the Mongol Yuan after Khanbaliq-now Beijing was evacuated by the Emperor. Thus we get Hongwu the Great
Rome was in the right place, at the right time, with the right people. Looking at its history, it is easy to understand why the Romans thought fate itself was on their side. It sure looks from the outside looking in that the stars themselves aligned for Rome.
Where is Rome? Point at central Italy
Where is Constantinople? Point at the Bosporus
Where is the Roman Empire? Point at the Heart
@toldinstone chances are you might not see this, but would you consider making a video about piracy in the Roman era?
Where's the China part in this lmao?
Rome lasted 1128 years, 753 BC - 337, 353-375, 378-395. Constantine XI was a Byzantine emperor lmao. Egypt (3150 BC - 526 BC; 2624 years) surpasses it by far and wide. This is just a Romaboo echo chamber.
And you are part of the chinaboo echo chamber.
Yeah this video was just romaphile clickbait. Why are the dynasties of Egypt, Persia, and China counted as seperate things while the constantly evolving government forms and dynasties of Rome are not? Treating Rome as if it was unique in its longevity while ignoring the fact that other empires also saw themselves as being a single continous state is very disingenuous.
@@swest6982 doesnt change the fact rome became the greatest in the ancient world. Surpassing even chyna and persia or any of that path etic empir
@@jmgonzales7701Citations needed
@@jmgonzales7701Rome was not greater at all.
It was vastly inferior to China.
The real Rome was the friends we made along the way.
For those who think "China" was one continuous empire with different "dynasties", this is wrong. Each "dynasty" means "a completely different empire." It would be like saying that there was one continuous state in Italy since the Roman conquest of Italy, and that subsequent local or foreign rulers were simply different dynasties.
If that's too hard to grasp, a "dynasty" in the normal sense means "a ruling family." The way they use it to describe Chinese history means "a different state."
No it wasn’t lol, china is a civilization, not just a country, the ruler of china had to follow a civilizational mandate called the Mandate of Heaven to have legitimacy. Thesis who became the rulers were called son’s of Heaven, because they brought peace and prosperity to china. When they couldn’t that’s when someone new would rise up and over throw them. It wasn’t just a collapse like Rome because the Chinese never lost their identity unlike the Italians and the Greeks.
@@Trill-Is-Real China is part of East Asian civilization, and is a model for it. China is not a civilization unto itself.
@@Trill-Is-Real China is not a civilization. It never was. It was part of a wider array of countries in East Asia, such as Japan, Korea, Vietnam, or even Tibet. China itself was frequently divided into different countries, and even Han and Tang China had independent countries next to them in what is today's PRC.
@@Nonamearisto china is a civilization since the dawn of civilization itself. They were one the first civilizations to ever exist on the face of the planet. To claim it wasn’t ridiculous nonsense. The country’s of japan, Korea and Vietnam in their various forms have recognized that for thousands of years. Most of the cultural that the other East Asian states even have comes mostly from China. They were considered barbarians by the Chinese at one point.
@@Trill-Is-Real China is a country. East Asia is a civilization. Like Western, Hindu, or Islamic civilizations.
“The Empire never ended.” -PKD
China is still around. Rome isn't. Italy is, but modern Italy is not a direct continuation of Rome. If we consider both the Roman Republic and Roman Empire as Rome, then China is still standing.
The current maoist regime is not remotely related to the dynasties of the ancient world 😂
@@SithStudy Oh yes it is, not just remotely, but very closely. Like I said, it's a direct continuation of the dynasties that lasted until last century. Nothing about the old world. China had a direct dynastic lineage from 3000 years ago up until 1912. And then it was taken over by Chinese republicans. If Rome can con from monarchy to republic to empire and still be Rome, China is still China to this day.
@@frustis fair point, but what about when the Mongols conquered all of China? That means the ancient lineage ends there right?
@@SithStudy That is a very good point and one I raised to several of my Chinese friends too. I don't have any personal opinion on the matter, but I'll give you theirs. The reasoning goes that while *the north* of China became a part of the Mongol empire in the early 1200's, and the south decades later, the empire soon became fragmented, and Kublai Khan (one of Ghenghis' sons) took over the China + Mongolia part of the empire (which was no longer a single empire), adopting Chinese customs and renaming it Yuan. He took on Chinese names, language, clothing, and such. So modern Chinese historians do consider the interim period between as a conquest, but afterwards it's considered to be a dynasty led by a non-han ethnicity (much like the Qing dynasty, who were manchus), because that is how in fact the emperor pretended it to be.
And then, after the Yuan, in some one hundred years, the Ming dynasty began, and so the dynastic lineage continued.
Shout out to Julius Nepos. The true last (Western Emperor).
This video is unequivocally stamped as laowai rants
Kinda feel china is historys most durable empire
It depends on how you count continuity. If you count each dynasty change as one empire because they kept the Mandate of Heaven institutions, overall yeah. China only had some periods of fragmentation. Early 2 dynasties lasted very long time. After that, dynasties would be short lived in comparison, but the institutions would be left relatively intact. Even with foreigner control, usually it is still recognizable as China.
However, if people count as each dynastic period being distinct, then China after the first two dynasties just look like it breaks and reforms a lot. People usually don't see Rome this way in terms of dynasty, so it feels like a long continuum even when their dynasties or generals/dictators fall. It is just a vast different system in the end. I'd say China is a contender.
In terms of dynasty continuity, Zhou last 790 years. I don't see any Roman dynasty come close to this. Also, Roman Empire people will count Republican period till Byzantine. Some may add HRE and Ottoman Empire. In this case, it would be fair to count China since the Xia period till Qing.
I count it like this
China is still china
And hasnt been anything else
Its not by the way
Why do Romeaboos always think that Rome was just the absolute greatest, and that no other civilisation equalled it?
ROMEABOOS AND THEIR CREATIVE INTERPRETATION OF FACTS.I think it takes a very generous interpretation of 'Roman Empire' to claim it lasted 1500 Years when it didn't last those 1500 years as any single contiguous entity for the majority.
-- The Roman Empire, defined as originating from the conquest of the Mediterranean (i.e. Greece, Hispania, North Africa) dates to about 146 BCE and that lasted till 450s CE, so some 600 years. Which is impressive for sure, but all things considered it's in the general ballpark.
-- The Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantine Empire being framed as essentially the same as the classical Roman empire and not a significantly reduced wing with territories permanently lost is wishful thinking rightly demolished by Adrian Goldsworthy. If it originated from the founding of Constantinople it lasted from 330 CE to 1204 CE as a single continuous entry, albeit it lost permanently territories in Egypt, Levant, Anatolia by then already. Pockets in Trebizond recovered the state which limped till the Ottomans put it out of a misery (in what was essentially a foregone conclusion).
The Roman Empire seen clearly isn't an example for longevity at all.
I always enjoy seeing articles - primarily written by women - flabbergasted by the seeming ubiquity of men's love for Ancient Rome.
Manchild.
Manchild energy.
where are you going to read these articles? tf do you do in your free time?
Chinese civilization was always disconnected from all others though, this makes it way easier to think of it as one dynasty
The Founding Fathers modeled our Republic on the Roman Republic. They wrote the Constitution at at time of historic debt, historic inflation, and insurrections, and this was after surviving the American War for Independence. They thought about the question of succession, about successive generations degenerating because of the success of their fathers, and how civil wars settled disputes. They came up with our system. The constitution was made for hard times. It was written in harder times. Revolution and rebirth, once we declare independence from the Anglo-American Empire, based out of the City of London.
No one cares.
I'm optimist about our financial doom and rebirth.@@Doomer_Optimist
This reminds me about the western world.. and how..
Another fact why Roman rule survived for so long: The wise use of engineering and technology for public works. Foreigners saw Roman culture and public management as superior and wanted to imitate it, even to the point of being voluntarily absorbed by it. Baths, aqueducts, roads, bridges, ports, giant amphitheatres and magnificent cities mesmerized anyone who came from wilder lands so Rome was the synonym for progress and perfectionism.
But maybe that also draw the attention from sacking armies and waves of immigration, so it's like a two sided coin.
Rome never dies. It just went missing in action.
5:33 i live in the us and holy shit does this sound similar
Byzantium is a separate Hellenic Empire and is not the contiuation of Roman Empire. The Roman Empire fell in 5th century, end of the story. If you count the Byzantine Empire "the Roman Empire", then you should also count the Ottoman Empire, they also called themselves Romans at Mehmed II's time.
Then the Russians as well.
the empire never fell. it morphed.
How about the Japanese empire? Still exists and started a long time before BCE. Ethiopia another possibility and China?
Japan as a nation-state certainly did not exist until well after the beginning of current system for recording the passing of the years (the modern Common Era, abbreviated BCE and CE). The Jomon people came to Japan a very long time ago, but we know nothing about their language or political organization. The Yayoi people came to Japan about 400 BCE and brought rice agriculture but were not a single political state. According to Wikipedia
". . . the Yayoi tribes gradually coalesced into a number of kingdoms. In the earliest written work to unambiguously mention Japan, the Book of Han, published in 111 AD, states that one hundred kingdoms comprised Japan, which is referred to as Wa. A later Chinese work of history, the Book of Wei, states that by 240 AD, the powerful kingdom of Yamatai, ruled by the female monarch Himiko, had gained ascendancy over the others . . . "
I am of the opinion this Yamatai kingdom is the first political arrangement to manage a large portion of modern Japan, but northern Honshu did not come under the control of the imperial/feudal system until the Nara period (700 CE) and Hokkaido not until the Edo period (1600 CE)
@@professorsogol5824 Japan has existed since at least 250. The current borders is a horrible argument lmao, countries change borders all the time.
@@Ghiyath981 We are basically in agreement. The thesis of this video is that the Roman Empire existed for a very long time and may be the empire that lasted the longest. kaloarepo288 offers the "Japanese Empire" as a rival in durability, arguing that it started "a long time before BCE." I disagreed with that assessment stating that Japan as a nation-state did not come into existence until sometime during what is now called CE. You agree stating Japan has been around since 250CE. Wikipedia states Japan gradually became unified under. a central government between 300 and 900 CE, and I think that assessment is correct. So our assessments differ only by a hundred years or so. Now our debate turns to the definition of "empire" but I would argue that Japan was not have imperialistic ambitions until the Meiji period, beginning in 1860.
@@professorsogol5824 Japan with 1774 years (and growing) beats Rome with 1128 years handily.
@@Ghiyath981 I would like to know how you define "empire" such that Japan has been an empire for 1774 years. In. my opinion, the first imperialistic effort was Hideyoshi's two failed attempts to subjugate Korea in the 1590s. This was followed by 200 years of isolationist policies by the Tokugawa shogunate (the Edo Period), and there were no further imperialistic ambitions until the Meiji Period.
This video really doesn’t touch on 4 important factors: who they conquered, their enemies demands, enemies, slavery+genealogy, & the society’s relationship with the state as a most necessary entity⬇️
For “states” conquered romans themselves were apart of the greater Hellenic sphere of influence that existed since the Sea people’s confederation. More specifically the rise of the Phoenicians, particularly at Tyre and it was the greeks who record Emperor Cadmus founded the dynasty of thebes as testament of their early influence. And on the reverse end, the phonecians absorbed many elements from Philisitines of Greece who settled near by and continuously shared ideas (though its mostly one sided🇱🇧)
As one remembers, later after centuries of phonecian influence on the greeks, both would colonize huge parts of the Mediterranean (where the soon to be roman empire would reign) bringing with them shared influences.
This would heightened via Alexander the Great, Hannibal Barca, & Massanisa (whose family was in contact w/ roman elites).
The tribes conquered by Romans did not have a concept of nation states nor a national culture on top of a regional one. With brutal conquest and assimilation, they would become much harder to break away without a large cultural unit like Carthage or Egypt. This also applies to greek city states to an extant. They did have a regional culture but the romans were just an extension of the hellenic sphere since the beginning albeit barely.
Compare this with the middle east’s diversity of more centralized yet culturally alien states.
Rome’s enemies siphoned off the empire. Outside tribes wanted money. The Sassanids seeker legitimacy through the “romans paying taxes” to the king of kings. Nomads genuinely believed all states paying taxes were apart of their empire. However their concept of empire was akin to the phrase “community of the realm”.
Geographically almost any break away state would be at the mercy of neighboring barbarians except italy and Spain.
Another underrated reason was slavery. The romans practiced slavery at an unparalleled scale. When they were freed…who were they in the empire that enslaved them? ROMAN! Thus people identifying as roman grew and spread the idea through marriage to the point that one historian recounted that by the second century AD, any roman could account at least one slave in their geneology of a couple generations ago.
Zoroastrian Persia, China, & India weren’t too big fans.
Lastly was their worship of the state as opposed to just lineages compared to any neighbor. I mean the losses at the punic & Phyric wars would make any civilization pause in their tracks. But rome was fundamentally alien than the rest culturally speaking, more akin to China.
Certainly not like other societies that placed clans below nobility and religion
Geography also explains in general how Europe became so powerful. It’s all coastline.
yes its because of geography, trade and European intelligence the reason europe became the greatest civilization of the world.
@@jmgonzales7701 And will fall with the rise of Africa.
@@S3Kglitches africa? They have too many problems for it to make a rise. Tbh i think it might be somewhere in asia.
@@S3Kglitches If there were no more food handouts in africa the continent would go back to where it was, for a while at least.
@@jmgonzales7701 It doesn't require an army or any organization. They simply wander here and invade by birth and rape. Can't you see?
Saying Rome outlasts China would be too ridiculous considering Chinese still speak and write Chinese while Latin is a dead language. I guess the title is purely a click bait and it worked.
LMAO u think ancient Chinese is the same as modern Mandarin? 😂
@@SithStudy pronunciation changes, which is the case for almost every language, but the writing system doesn't change much. By every standard Chinese is not a dead language like Latin.
spanish, italian, french, portugese and romanian are living latin dialects even if very distinct from classical latin@@Katzeleben6028
latin is a dead language in a sense that it evolved into the languages of spanish, italian, french and romanian. LOL same can apply to ancient chinese and the 8 different dialects spoken in china
The Romans gave engineering law, government literature abd we in the west inherited that culture gave like the Greeks before them and to bronze age powers before them these was the legacy of the Romans historical classical era and was why east and western Europe the Romans empire lasted so long from ancient Italy i believe came this greatist empire in history
It never has.
Everything Rome was still lives in every western country to various degrees.
Sure wish your videos were longer. but I guess the algorithm does not favor those.
…engineering!
Just a note: Even today, water transportation is cheaper for shipping.
3:50
S.P.Q.R AEDEM CONCORDIAE VETVSTATE CONLAPSAM
IN MILJOREM FACIEM OPERE & CULIV SPLENDIORE RESTITU(???)
What does that even mean?
Should change the title from "Why Rome Lasted Longer than China" to "China is the longest surviving nation and civilization on Earth but Roman legacy lasted even longer than Chinese legacy".
Modern historians are the kind of people, who if you show them a morphing video of a chair turning into a bench turning into a bed will then claim that a chair is a bed
To this guy the European theatre of WW2 was just a roman civil war.
@@arthurg.calixto3338
That's because Westerners don't want to admit that China was vastly greater than Rome.
They are constantly swimming in double standards and hypocrisy.
ROTAS
OPERA
TENET
AREPO
SATOR
From a muraled Tiber wall frescoe 'one Rome, one Italy, one state, one empire (imperial or papal) God or the Gods preserve it
i’m confused because china still outlasted, both as a concept, a state, a culture and imperial system
“For there was once a dream, a dream of Rome”
All modern states, take note📝!
I agree legalize slavery but not racist slavery that's messed up.
@@gaychinee 🤣🤣🤣
Denmark always gets overlooked as one of the oldest countries in the world.
It was just because of its military, and fell TWICE because of his military, or lack thereof
@5:17 and 7:32 why do you use the B word? This is a video about Rome not a made up name for the Romans...... 😔 Great content, still love the videos!
Taytriot here thanks tayleigh
Indeed, to this day, ships remain the most cost efficient way to distribute goods and resources around the world. I once read it costs more to get a bottle of Bordeaux across the dock in New York than it does to move it from France to North America by ship.
Sounds like taxes. That's cheating.
@@Fronzel41 Actually taxes might make a good way to define a nation state: Is there a central office that handles the accounting necessary to collect taxes and allocate the revenue? Our earliest written records are in fact accounting documents so our knowledge of the earliest empires depends on the bean counters.
@@professorsogol5824 The Roman Empire was definitely not a nation.
Yeah, because we have giant floating warehouses with the capacity of 20.000 TEU now. Of course your shipping costs per bottle is almost cero if you're able to ship millions of them.
@@neonity4294 I think you miss the point. It makes no difference if you send one case or a hundred cases, the cost per bottle from France to North America, 5,500 km, is a few cents on the bottle. To move those same bottles from from the dock in New York to the shop in New York by truck (10s of kms) is easily twice the cost (per bottle) of getting them across the Atlantic. So yes, the greater carrying capacity of ships both in the era of imperial Rome and now makes loading stuff onto a ship and shipping it much more cost effective than loading it onto 500 horses or a diesel powered 500 horse power truck.
I enjoy your work please dont take ads for ai chatbots. It makes me question your reliability as a historical source when youre willing to endorse a source of information that obfuscates sources and just like. Lies due to its stupidity.
Could the history of Greece been similar to Rome if Athens had conquered the other Greek city-states?
Hear ye hear ye, Toldins tone has appears again.
Usually it can be heard on Fridays after my break time. Anyone else hear this?
Who's Toldin and what's wrong with his tone?!?
Tace Stultus
Rome didn’t fall it disintegrated into kingdoms
Video interaction
Maybe the real Third Rome was the friends we made along the way.
rights AND responsibilities, thank you