yeah, according to this rome was apparently an empire when they were just a city state of disenfranchised Trojans that was also ruled by an elected senate -.- do the makers of this video even history?
@@Mario.albanese Ah, having looked into it, yes that was one story. Just a story though. It would have been news to the Etruscans that some foreigner founded their civilisation.
lmao the Romans had barely left Latium by 340 BC to fight the Samnite wars and you're telling me that they had anything outside of central Italy? This is incorrect.
thank you, you're the only person pointing this out. There was tremendous hardship against the other italian tribes, greeks and Etruscans and they didn't even occupy "most" of italy until 280BC.
This video is not only weirdly British focused, it has also many many innacuracies that anyone who has a basic knowledge of Roman history can notice. The Mesopotamian region, for example, is completely wrong, as it was only occupied for less than a century during Trajan's and Hadrian's rule.
In my opinion, it still is the greatest empire in human history. They were so ahead of their time in Government & Infrastructure, possible other conquests. A lot of it was lost for a period of time, when the empire diminished.
Great point, however this particular piece was originally created as part of an installation for the Vindolanda Museum at Hadrian's Wall on the English / Scottish border. Therefore, the focus was on the west.
Rome to Mediolanum to Ravenna for the western administration, actually. Before the administration split the capital of the Roman Empire was moved to Constantinople by Emperor Constantine on 330ad. Both eastern and western halves of the Roman Empire were still the same entity administered by two roman emperors. Greeks were still calling themselves Romans by the 20th Century.
The Eastern Roman Empire was not Roman, it wasn’t the Roman Empire in any manner... easterners are not Latin, they didn’t speak Latin but Greek, they weren’t Roman Catholic but eastern Orthodox, they had Greek mentality, culture and traditions apart from Greek language and Greek ancestry! The Easterners saw Westerners as uneducated people and the Latins saw their Byzantine counterparts as pompous... It was Roman because Rome ruled over it, but calling it Roman after Rome, Latin Rome/Western Rome, fell is not very realistic. It’s as if the British capital was moved to Scotland, then Britain divided in two, England fell and the Scottish were called English! *The Scots under London’s rule are not really English but we could say they are “anglified” but they definitely wouldn’t be if England separated from Scotland, well it’s the exact same for the Byzantines.*
Actually all the modern historians agreed that the Eastern Roman Empire was the medieval Roman Empire. All the things you said are old prejudices from 1800 and are not true. For more info, you can read "The greek-roman Empire".
Holland and germany were occupied for a short period of time (20 years or something like that) but then, thanks to the ambush of teutoburg forest and Arminius (or Irmin), romans were driven out, but you're partially right, this map is inaccurate since romans lost control over holland in 8 AD not in 117 AD
I'm sure holland was fully occupied (but as i said for a short period of time), romans conquered a great part of germany too but then they lost control over it and they used the rhine as a natural border
It wasn't because of Teutoburg that the Romans left. If anything, Tiberius' son Germanicus defeated many German tribes and forced them to submit. However, Rome found it easier just to maintain the border at the Rhine with forts and keep puppet kings in control over the Germanic tribes who paid tribute to Rome
Very generous with how much land is shown in the Levant. Those borders were constantly changing and often included tributary states, not along the Mediterranean but further East towards Ancient Parthia.
Filip Todorovic well, at the end of the video, they clearly say that the last western Roman emperor (Romulus Augustule) is overthrown in 476 A.D. However, for the eastern one, they don't give the year, which is 1453 A.D. You can't speak of the whole Roman empire's fall in 476, neither in 1453.
That will always be debated, like how the true Byzantine dynasty ended in 1461, at the fall of Trebizond. But, neither Trebizond or the Byzantines were truly Roman, and the true empire historians talk about is honored in the eastern half but was not the same culture, language, or ethnicity. They certainly held the prestige, but not the structure. I'd argue the Byzantines actually had a better structure, with the theme system and their hold over greek and turkish lands, but in their outer territories they ended up with the same problems as the romans.
If you are counting Roman military expeditions and merchant trade then the reach of the empire is actually insane. They occupied the Garamantes in the Southern Libyan desert led expeditions down the Nile as far south as South Sudan, and the Senegal River, and text like the Periplus of the Erythrean sea depicted trade throughout the Indian ocean.
Andreja Stosevski I think it's because this is referring to the Roman Empire as a singular whole,right up to the peak of it's power.So i think it doesn't cover the Empire post split,since the main Empire was the European Empire,and not the Eastern Empire since technically they were considered as Byzantines by most historians at this point.
The Roman Empire didn't arise until well after 45 BC. The death of Gaius Julius Caesar signified the fall of the Roman Republic, and created the political vacuum that allowed Octavian to defeat Mark Antony and win popular Roman support ~25BC
Maybe someone noticed this before, but in 271/273 AD Dacia (wich was conquered by Emperor Trajan) was deserted by the romans, so the image of it being a part of the Empire in 407 AD is wrong.
Hey, 1:04 I'm from the EASTEST province of Roman Empire. Exactly from that little "eagle nose" from the right :) Today muslim country, but once Christian country - very first lands where Christianity became the official religion of a state, even before Rome; Concretely saying, of Albania and Armenia - the neighbors. So, I'm one of the left few, proud descendants of the first Christians and Rome patrial ancestors. Peace&Loves go to you all👍
The Romans did not have recorded audio, so in a way it is more historically accurate. Of course, they didn't have video either... Also, it was made for a particular installation which did not require audio.
Bruh Romans only took control of whole Iberian Peninsula in 19 AC, even tho roman writers reported many Northern Iberian tribes kept figthing in the mountains and romans never took control of it, until germanic tribes came to Iberia and signed a treaty with the natives to live peacefully along each other.
It is Brittania under Rome, but not the map of Roman Empire. Personally, I expected to see when Rome established colonies in Crimea and how long did they last according to the name that video suggested I could have had exactly such expectations. However, I did not see any Crimea at all.
The roman empire cease to exist when it split into the western roman empire and the eastern roman empire. The Roman empire didn't end in 1453, because what you were referring to wasn't the Roman Empire, but the last visage of Rome that fell.
It was Hispania, not Spain. Hispania was the name given to the Iberian Peninsula. Before Spain came to exist there were many other kingdoms, one of which still exists, Portugal (not a kingdom now, but a republic), Spain was the joining of the other Iberian kingdoms, such has Castella, Leon, Navarra, Galicia... So, Hispania is in no way synonymous of Spain or the ancient name for it.
You're showing Dacia still part of the Empire in 476. This is not true. Dacia was abandoned in 271 by the emperor Aurelian. Even Moesia was no longer part of the Empire by that time, being lost to the Goths in 378.
Hispania is not Spain. Spain is a modern country, Hispania was the Iberian Peninsula name given by the Romans. It includes Spain, Portugal, Andorra, Gibraltar and a very smal part of France.
Romans in the Hebrides? On the Isle of Man? I can understand the premature and late conquests of regions, I can even write off the fact you had Roman control sprout instead of build as an artistic choice. But to be so blatantly inaccurate that a quick google search would have shown you otherwise is frankly inexcusable even disregarding the other dozen mistakes. Frankly, what's even more disturbing is the number of likes this video has, now thousands of people have been misinformed because of your laziness.
Man, you just have to look up wikipedia for 5 minutes to make a better structure than this.. You don't even need to read a book for that basic information. Rome had a Monarchy, then a Republic (most commonly divided into early, middle and late) and only after Octavians victory did he get the Imperium Romanum "handed" to him by the senate. The "starting" date of 753 BC is pretty much mythological/made up by annalists. The text is very simplified but for the sake of understanding late antiquity they should have mentioned east and west rome. Would have been much better to divide it into those most basic sections, instead of showing a creeping red color that tells us very little.
The main relation was Constantine(first Christian Emperor [for hours before his death]) moved Rome's capital to Constantinople. Basically, all the taxes & aristocrats[$$$] shifted to the much more profitable Eastern half of the empire(where all those rich Greek city-states were). This left the Western half to die a not so slow death under its own weight & bad leadership. For reference to how un-important Rome had become, after the empire split(again), Rome was not even the capital of the Western Roman Empire. The Eastern Roman Empire survived till the end of the middle ages. Heck, Christopher Columbus was born, and about 2 years old when the Roman Empire finally kicked the bucket.
So it isn't anything psychological based on religion? I can imagine Roman conquerors fuelled up by old gods of war and somehow the new all loving god did not fit into the belligerence needed to be an empire. But then again the crusades happened, so maybe it's not religion but the nature of tribes. Most of the crusaders were Germanic.
Considering that the Empire survived more than a millennium past it's conversion, I'd say no. If anything it helped keep it united by creating a common ideology.
The right is 753BC-1453AD . The Roman Emperor Constantine moved the capital from Rome and built "Constantinopolis" the new Rome at 330AD. From 330AD to 395AD the capital of Roman Empire was Constantinople. After the 395AD the Roman Empire was divided to Western Roman Empire (capital mediolanum and Ravenna) and to Eastern Roman Empire (capital Constantinople).
1:48 Trump: Are YOU building a wall,Hadrian? Hadrian:Yes,can't I? *smack fight punch shit bleh bleh bleh boom exploszives mexico avatar bleh bleh I can't take this anymore kill me.*
So it really was Constantine's fault. By converting to Christianity, which is a foreign belief system, the Romans lost their unique culture -- the same culture that defeated Carthage and all other enemies in the past.
Ceaser then fail in Britian. He went , won and left because then there was no need to take the land. Yet he did defeat all the tribes trying to repel him.
I regret to point out that the time evolution of the expansion of Rome's domains is quite inaccurate.
yeah, according to this rome was apparently an empire when they were just a city state of disenfranchised Trojans that was also ruled by an elected senate -.-
do the makers of this video even history?
Trojans? I think not.
@@Pooknottin actually yes, according to the legend
@@Mario.albanese Whose legend?
@@Mario.albanese Ah, having looked into it, yes that was one story. Just a story though. It would have been news to the Etruscans that some foreigner founded their civilisation.
lmao the Romans had barely left Latium by 340 BC to fight the Samnite wars and you're telling me that they had anything outside of central Italy? This is incorrect.
thank you, you're the only person pointing this out. There was tremendous hardship against the other italian tribes, greeks and Etruscans and they didn't even occupy "most" of italy until 280BC.
Yep. The expansion of the Middle-Late Republic is like 200 years off
This video is not only weirdly British focused, it has also many many innacuracies that anyone who has a basic knowledge of Roman history can notice. The Mesopotamian region, for example, is completely wrong, as it was only occupied for less than a century during Trajan's and Hadrian's rule.
jmiquelmb And the fact that Dacia were occupied by 300. They weren't.
well it has to be british focused since it is for made for an installation in the Vindolanda Museum at Hadrian's Wall
"for less than a century during Trajan's and Hadrian's rule."...it was occupied for few months.
Caucasian Albania (in the east Caucasus) was only a vassal for a very brief period. Also, wasn't Carthage conquered earlier than Greece?
paprskomet I mean, that IS less than a century. I get your point though.
In my opinion, it still is the greatest empire in human history. They were so ahead of their time in Government & Infrastructure, possible other conquests. A lot of it was lost for a period of time, when the empire diminished.
Why only tell half the story? What about the Eastern Roman Empire? The capital was moved from Rome to Constantinople anyway.
Great point, however this particular piece was originally created as part of an installation for the Vindolanda Museum at Hadrian's Wall on the English / Scottish border. Therefore, the focus was on the west.
Rome to Ravenna, actually.
Rome to Mediolanum to Ravenna for the western administration, actually. Before the administration split the capital of the Roman Empire was moved to Constantinople by Emperor Constantine on 330ad. Both eastern and western halves of the Roman Empire were still the same entity administered by two roman emperors. Greeks were still calling themselves Romans by the 20th Century.
The Eastern Roman Empire was not Roman, it wasn’t the Roman Empire in any manner... easterners are not Latin, they didn’t speak Latin but Greek, they weren’t Roman Catholic but eastern Orthodox, they had Greek mentality, culture and traditions apart from Greek language and Greek ancestry! The Easterners saw Westerners as uneducated people and the Latins saw their Byzantine counterparts as pompous... It was Roman because Rome ruled over it, but calling it Roman after Rome, Latin Rome/Western Rome, fell is not very realistic.
It’s as if the British capital was moved to Scotland, then Britain divided in two, England fell and the Scottish were called English! *The Scots under London’s rule are not really English but we could say they are “anglified” but they definitely wouldn’t be if England separated from Scotland, well it’s the exact same for the Byzantines.*
Actually all the modern historians agreed that the Eastern Roman Empire was the medieval Roman Empire. All the things you said are old prejudices from 1800 and are not true. For more info, you can read "The greek-roman Empire".
A very inaccurate and poorly researched map. Flashy graphics do not make up for bad history.
Lol
What’s good big ronnie lmao
@@ronaldlo8818 Lol
@@ronaldlo8818 hello king Lo
@@ronaldlo8818 how's it going big lo
Rome wasn’t always an empire.
First it was a monarch, then a republic, and then an empire.
I feel bad for the 2.4k people who liked this video who were falsely educated about the Roman Empire.
Holland, above the Rhine river was never occupied by the Romans. You also use today's topography. Just saying.
Holland and germany were occupied for a short period of time (20 years or something like that) but then, thanks to the ambush of teutoburg forest and Arminius (or Irmin), romans were driven out, but you're partially right, this map is inaccurate since romans lost control over holland in 8 AD not in 117 AD
holland was occupied but not above the rhine river the frysians hold the line against the roman army the never occupied the netherlands fully
I'm sure holland was fully occupied (but as i said for a short period of time), romans conquered a great part of germany too but then they lost control over it and they used the rhine as a natural border
It wasn't because of Teutoburg that the Romans left. If anything, Tiberius' son Germanicus defeated many German tribes and forced them to submit. However, Rome found it easier just to maintain the border at the Rhine with forts and keep puppet kings in control over the Germanic tribes who paid tribute to Rome
Very generous with how much land is shown in the Levant. Those borders were constantly changing and often included tributary states, not along the Mediterranean but further East towards Ancient Parthia.
Dacia did not last as part of the Roman Empire into the 5th Century AD.
Lost interest once it solely focused on Britain and then brushed over the Byzantine empire.
I lost focus once it thought that the Romans had Sardinia, all of Sicily, Cisalpine Gaul, Corisca, and all of the Italian Peninsula at 509 BC.
Roman Empire ended in 1453, not 476
It all depends on which part of the Empire you refer to. The Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD, the Eastern one in 1453.
Stan Marche It is ALL "The Roman Empire"
Filip Todorovic well, at the end of the video, they clearly say that the last western Roman emperor (Romulus Augustule) is overthrown in 476 A.D. However, for the eastern one, they don't give the year, which is 1453 A.D. You can't speak of the whole Roman empire's fall in 476, neither in 1453.
That will always be debated, like how the true Byzantine dynasty ended in 1461, at the fall of Trebizond. But, neither Trebizond or the Byzantines were truly Roman, and the true empire historians talk about is honored in the eastern half but was not the same culture, language, or ethnicity. They certainly held the prestige, but not the structure. I'd argue the Byzantines actually had a better structure, with the theme system and their hold over greek and turkish lands, but in their outer territories they ended up with the same problems as the romans.
Hell if we go even further the remnants of the Byzantine Empire lasted until 19th century
This is the second video I've seen on this channel about ancient Rome and they're both historically innaccurate.
This map is wrong in so many ways. Good animation bad research
I’m supposed to be watching this for my history class-
it's not exact
This is used by schools what-
The Roman Empire lasted from 27 BC to 476, not 753 BC. 753 BC was when the city was founded, not the empire.
If you are counting Roman military expeditions and merchant trade then the reach of the empire is actually insane. They occupied the Garamantes in the Southern Libyan desert led expeditions down the Nile as far south as South Sudan, and the Senegal River, and text like the Periplus of the Erythrean sea depicted trade throughout the Indian ocean.
0:45
Um, Julius Caesar tried to invade Britain 5 years later in 55 BC. in 60 BC he wasn't even governor of Gaul and wasn't even a consul yet.
Cool that this museum in north new castle is not busy at all
Hey...are there any specific tutorials available for this type of work?
And why are you not mentioning that the Eastern Roman Empire survived a thousand years more?
Andreja Stosevski I think it's because this is referring to the Roman Empire as a singular whole,right up to the peak of it's power.So i think it doesn't cover the Empire post split,since the main Empire was the European Empire,and not the Eastern Empire since technically they were considered as Byzantines by most historians at this point.
@@cmdr.lochagos shame tho.
Still a bit salty that the holy *"roman empire"* exists.
A lot of things in this, such as 'the last legitimate western emperor is driven out of Italy' are simply not considered true any more.
The Roman Empire didn't arise until well after 45 BC. The death of Gaius Julius Caesar signified the fall of the Roman Republic, and created the political vacuum that allowed Octavian to defeat Mark Antony and win popular Roman support ~25BC
Why is half the video focused on Great Britain? I want to see the other parts of the empire too!
1:08 loool fail The Netherlands didn't have Flevoland back then the Flevopolder didn't exist untill 1968 xD
Shouldn't it be Roman Kingdom for the first years, then the Roman Republic? The Roman Empire only existed after Julius Caesar.
is there supposed to be volume/audio?
Maybe someone noticed this before, but in 271/273 AD Dacia (wich was conquered by Emperor Trajan) was deserted by the romans, so the image of it being a part of the Empire in 407 AD is wrong.
Hey,
1:04 I'm from the EASTEST province of Roman Empire.
Exactly from that little "eagle nose" from the right :)
Today muslim country, but once Christian country - very first lands where Christianity became the official religion of a state, even before Rome;
Concretely saying, of Albania and Armenia - the neighbors.
So, I'm one of the left few, proud descendants of the first Christians and Rome patrial ancestors.
Peace&Loves go to you all👍
whats with the dark and light red variations on the map?
I insist, how do you make these animations? What software do you use?
I'm pretty sure the Romans never colonised the Isle of Man
They did, actually
You missed out that Asterix's village in northern Gaul was not occupied...
What the hell? why did it end in half of the real story did you git board?
No sound?
The Romans did not have recorded audio, so in a way it is more historically accurate. Of course, they didn't have video either...
Also, it was made for a particular installation which did not require audio.
:D Nice one.
Thanks for replying you made my day.
Good videos btw.
Haha i was wondering too “is my ipad mute”
wow thank you very cool
Plz update the sound
Bruh Romans only took control of whole Iberian Peninsula in 19 AC, even tho roman writers reported many Northern Iberian tribes kept figthing in the mountains and romans never took control of it, until germanic tribes came to Iberia and signed a treaty with the natives to live peacefully along each other.
there is no sound?
simplistic and incomplete
where is the expansion in Dacia?
No sound though. thank you for the video
Anyone watching for history class?
For social studies, yes.
It is Brittania under Rome, but not the map of Roman Empire. Personally, I expected to see when Rome established colonies in Crimea and how long did they last according to the name that video suggested I could have had exactly such expectations. However, I did not see any Crimea at all.
The roman empire fell in 1453 though... so yea.
The roman empire cease to exist when it split into the western roman empire and the eastern roman empire. The Roman empire didn't end in 1453, because what you were referring to wasn't the Roman Empire, but the last visage of Rome that fell.
@@guntherdoesaliltrolling5757 Bullshit. Why did it cease to exist? And what split should have caused this and how?
Is it just me what is there no sound?
great man! do more of this historical animations ! Also in the future do for Bulgaria and Byzantine because they were always in conflicts
You gotta be kidding me this historical animation sucks and is completely inaccurate
they should add music to this video
why no sounds ?
There was no turkey it was all Greek land/Pontian(Greek)/Assyrian
This was so half assed
OMG. Rome has conquered all of Italy in 509BC. WTF!!
It was Hispania, not Spain. Hispania was the name given to the Iberian Peninsula. Before Spain came to exist there were many other kingdoms, one of which still exists, Portugal (not a kingdom now, but a republic), Spain was the joining of the other Iberian kingdoms, such has Castella, Leon, Navarra, Galicia... So, Hispania is in no way synonymous of Spain or the ancient name for it.
I think this video is just a summary of events, and a *highly* low detailed video
You're showing Dacia still part of the Empire in 476. This is not true. Dacia was abandoned in 271 by the emperor Aurelian.
Even Moesia was no longer part of the Empire by that time, being lost to the Goths in 378.
Hispania is not Spain. Spain is a modern country, Hispania was the Iberian Peninsula name given by the Romans. It includes Spain, Portugal, Andorra, Gibraltar and a very smal part of France.
1:16 Romans in Lewis and Harris? Lol
The focus on Britain is real...curious, since it was one of the provinces the Romans cared least about.
Uh you forgot the Roman Republic.
Rose year 753 BC. Ended 1453 AD.
the song 'The sound of silence' from Simon & Garfunkel would have made a great background tune
Roman empire is alive and well.
Romans in the Hebrides? On the Isle of Man? I can understand the premature and late conquests of regions, I can even write off the fact you had Roman control sprout instead of build as an artistic choice. But to be so blatantly inaccurate that a quick google search would have shown you otherwise is frankly inexcusable even disregarding the other dozen mistakes. Frankly, what's even more disturbing is the number of likes this video has, now thousands of people have been misinformed because of your laziness.
I had no sound
Woow this is the world most big
The Italian Peninsula was unified under Roman rule in the 3rd century bce not the fifth!
Muffed the context bad, especially in the east. They expanding into the then Greek world and left a new Greek world via the Byzantines.
So many inaccuracies it is completely wrong
His video was poorly made and had too much emphasis on England.
If i wanted to read something I wouldn't come to youtube, please voice over time lapse
Man, you just have to look up wikipedia for 5 minutes to make a better structure than this.. You don't even need to read a book for that basic information. Rome had a Monarchy, then a Republic (most commonly divided into early, middle and late) and only after Octavians victory did he get the Imperium Romanum "handed" to him by the senate. The "starting" date of 753 BC is pretty much mythological/made up by annalists. The text is very simplified but for the sake of understanding late antiquity they should have mentioned east and west rome.
Would have been much better to divide it into those most basic sections, instead of showing a creeping red color that tells us very little.
This video is a bit wrong
You have to work on your history, bro.
no sound I got bored and died get sound or music I am dead
RIP
Is there some relation between Rome falling right after it became Christian?
The main relation was Constantine(first Christian Emperor [for hours before his death]) moved Rome's capital to Constantinople. Basically, all the taxes & aristocrats[$$$] shifted to the much more profitable Eastern half of the empire(where all those rich Greek city-states were). This left the Western half to die a not so slow death under its own weight & bad leadership.
For reference to how un-important Rome had become, after the empire split(again), Rome was not even the capital of the Western Roman Empire.
The Eastern Roman Empire survived till the end of the middle ages. Heck, Christopher Columbus was born, and about 2 years old when the Roman Empire finally kicked the bucket.
So it isn't anything psychological based on religion? I can imagine Roman conquerors fuelled up by old gods of war and somehow the new all loving god did not fit into the belligerence needed to be an empire.
But then again the crusades happened, so maybe it's not religion but the nature of tribes. Most of the crusaders were Germanic.
Christianity made the Roman people weak, no longer focused on this life, but on some imagined one after it. They were no longer warriors, but sheep
Considering that the Empire survived more than a millennium past it's conversion, I'd say no. If anything it helped keep it united by creating a common ideology.
religion F's everything up XD
YE BOI ITS IAN
The right is 753BC-1453AD . The Roman Emperor Constantine moved the capital from Rome and built "Constantinopolis" the new Rome at 330AD. From 330AD to 395AD the capital of Roman Empire was Constantinople. After the 395AD the Roman Empire was divided to Western Roman Empire (capital mediolanum and Ravenna) and to Eastern Roman Empire (capital Constantinople).
1:48
Trump: Are YOU building a wall,Hadrian?
Hadrian:Yes,can't I?
*smack fight punch shit bleh bleh bleh boom exploszives mexico avatar bleh bleh I can't take this anymore kill me.*
They had my land to
This is a big lie the romans did not gu further than the rine rivier so your lieing
The persians?
*Trajanus *Hadrianus
Kinda inaccurate I think.
AD 70 Battle of Jerusalem Roman Empire VS Jewish
So it really was Constantine's fault. By converting to Christianity, which is a foreign belief system, the Romans lost their unique culture -- the same culture that defeated Carthage and all other enemies in the past.
Ceaser then fail in Britian. He went , won and left because then there was no need to take the land. Yet he did defeat all the tribes trying to repel him.
3 continents to East empire
they didnt invade the netherlands
The Netherlands didn't even exist.
WOW
Technically The Roman Empire lasted for over 2000 years.
This is a horridly inaccurate mapping, and history.
Roma Invicta!
very inaccurate
What is this nonsense? Completely innaccurate map
Que mapa más malo. Tiene demasiados errores y le da una importancia desmedida a los británicos
swat is biter
This is just wrong, we should all dislike and ISO DESIGN should remove it.
SPEAK!!!
🇪🇸