28:22 My brother in Christ, Emperor Justinian was not an ethnic slav, but rather a Latinized Thracian. The northern balkan border of the Eastern Roman Empire was thoroughly Romanized and was Latin speaking rather than greek because of the quantity of roman armies that were stationed there for many centuries, hence the origins of the Romanians, a latin roman people in a sea of slavs.
@@koboldgeorge2140 he doesn't even mention civil roles crippling the empire but instead attributes the fall to simply geography? The Byzantines had amazing geography. On east there were the Armenian and Taurus mountains that blocked off movement into Anatolia . While on the west border there was the Adriatic, Danube and Carpathian mountains. The problem of the Byzantines wasn't external threats directly, moreso internal forces that prevented competent dealings with external threats.
“Warfare in the Middle Ages depended heavily on how many aggressive barbarians inside your own boarders you could recruit for your army.” Exactly why I love this era and one of my favorite whatifalthist quotes.
My Syrian ancestors have been living in Syria as Orthodox Christians since the Byzantines. I’m descended from a branch that immigrated over during the Ottoman persecution of WW1. Love the Byzantines 😃
Rather than saying that the Byzantine Empire was a story of a slow decline (not untrue) the important point is that they are the ultimate survivors from classical antiquity and that their tools of survival were exactly a distinctive roman political culture, military and diplomacy which was completely lost in the West and had to be reinvented.
@@wodzisaww.5500as a Roman Catholic, I can also assure you that it is particularly not compatible with modernism, since the idea of an advanced civilization that was a heavily theocratic society is haram lol. As a papist, I wish the eastern Roman Empire survived.
LOL! Homie mixed up the era of Justinian with the era of Heraclius. That is such a huge fuck up that one should seriously consider remaking the whole video.
As a Muslim, I think it is wrong that the Ottoman Turks made the Hagia Sophia, the greatest Orthodox church in world history, into a masjid (mosque). It was not right for Mustafa Kemal to make it a museum in the 1930s or for Erdogan to restore the jamii masjid in 2020 either. One day, Inshallah (God willing), the Greeks will have their church back in Istanbul (Constantinople).
You're compassion is refreshing... though it goes against Islamic teachings of not letting Christian churches be rebuilt... may I ask: "Why are you a Muslim?" and also: "Why do you remain Muslim?". How much do you know of Christianity? Especially Holy Spirit Filled Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity... Where Jesus died for your sins to save you from Hell...
@@MechMan2076 Umar (R.A.A.) preserved the church in Damascus; why couldn’t Mehmet “Fatih” do the same? Sheikh Imran Nazar Hossein’s interpretation of the events of 29 May 1453 and their aftermath do have some influence on me. The Ottomans are no longer my heroes, although they are better than the Kemalists and the Wahhabis. Furthermore, I am very happy being a Muslim, and it is written in the Holy Qur’an in Surah Maidah (5:82) that, “And thou wilt find the nearest of them in affection to those who believe (to be) those who say: Lo! We are Christians. That is because there are among them priests and monks, and because they are not proud.” In light of this passage, I am of the understanding that the Ummah (the international Muslim community) must treat Orthodox Christians such as the Greeks, Armenians, and Russians with a much higher level of compassion and empathy, as we near the time of the Dajjal (the Antichrist). I cannot say the same thing about Evangelicals and perhaps Western Christians in general, who, please pardon my language, are in bed with the Zionist menace. Peace.
Damn bro, I'm surprised 😮 But yeah I agree, I think it would be a big disrespect to Islam if say European colonizers turned the mosques into Christian churches.
Exactlyyyyy. People can’t stop to think for one second why someone is doing or saying something a certain way. As long as you know what land he’s talking about, it doesn’t matter what he calls it
The way this guy just uncritically uses these arbitrary categories cracks me up 😂 calling the byzantines a "mixed capitalist and socialist" economy is fucking nuts, like they were some kind of medieval scandinavia Ive listened to most of these podcasts up to this point, and i have to say i see why this guy is popular. He does a good job relating the broad strokes of a nations and period in a way where it feels relevant to the modern day. What ive noticed is that on the topics where im not so knowledgeable (spanish empire, or wwi for examples), he sounds very informed and persuasive, but when i listen to him talk about things im more knowledgeable in, such as rome, byzantium or ancient greece, it comes across as nearly childish caricature. From what i know, this guy's main thing is political commentary, so id like to share a couple things id like to see from this channel if the goal is really to provide quality historical information. 1) i do think that the self professed goal bridging of anthropology and history is a worthy one. To that end, id like to gear more about the anthropological frameworks youre working in, so that when youre discussing history i can see how youre putting the pieces together. 2) be more specific about the history youre discussing. In most of these videos, you only mention figures by name when they do something significant, and you reify trends and processes as though they just magically transpire. Usually historians illustrate trends by talking about specific individuals or events that illustrate or exmplify the process theyre talking about. This is also a great way to tie in the anthropology angle! 3) the guy """interviewing""" beeds to do some level of preparation. Any level. At all. In all these videos i dont think ive heard him ask a single question, he just kind of nods and moves you along to the next thing. Give him an outline of what youll be lecturing on beforehand, have him read the wikipedia page of the topic, anything just so that theres actually some kind of dialogue going on I think you two honestly have good chemistry, and i think you personally have a good presentation style, but these are some pretty glaring problems in my opinion. I took the time to write this because i like the idea behind this channel, and its something that not many other people are doing, in terms of trying to draw together these big picture historical images.
Literally haven't ever studied byzantium myself but just from hearing about them I remember detail that he doesn't, after supposedly reading books on them. Fumbled this one bad
You are really downplaying the importance of the "Byzantine Empire". Firstly, the term "Byzantine" is a modern invention and is historically inaccurate. It is the Eastern Roman Empire, and after the "fall" of the WRE, it simply was THE Roman Empire, all the way up until the capture of Constantinople by the Turks in the 15th century. Secondly, the ERE was not "Greek", at least not at the level of authority and societal elites. By the time Constantinople was founded in 324 AD, Greece had already been a part of the empire since 146 BC. At the point of the official split between East and West (in 395 AD), the culture of the elites was thoroughly "Greco-Roman". They all spoke both Latin and Greek. They were mostly Christian. The two cultures were completely and inseparably intertwined. In fact, the ERE (as most of the notable and wealthy Italian elites had already emigrated permanently to the East by the end) was MORE Roman than the WRE by its downfall, as since after "Crisis of the Third Century" and Diocletian's military reforms the Western Roman elite were essentially roaming warlords with very little connection to the common people and had their own "legionary culture" as they were a completely separate military caste at that point. The Eastern Roman Empire shielded Europe for a millennium (literally). If not for the bulwark of Constantinople, the Sassanids, Bulgars, Arab-Muslims, Mongols...all could or would have conquered the Balkans and attempted to push farther into Western Europe far, far before the Turks were able to do in the 15th-18th centuries. Without the defense and leadership (Roman emperor Alexios Komnenos initiated the First Crusade) of Eastern Rome, the West as we know it would never have form as quickly and relatively peacefully as it did, or very well could have been overrun.
Actually the Muslims went into the Iberian Peninsula and into France but Charles Martel AKA The Hammer defeated the Muslims and then went into the Iberian Peninsula until 1492.
In several sources i have read in primary form (Greek), Byzantine is used as a geographic adjective. Anna Komnena especially uses it a lot, for the city walls, the city inhabitants etc. They wanted to show their Greek knowledge so the term Byzantintine instead of Constantinopolitan was considered classy.
@@GG-wf6cb Byzantium was the name of the city prior to Constantine re-building and re-naming it. In Vietnam we have a modern example; the "original" and historical name of the city of Saigon is Saigon, but after the communist takeover they re-named it Ho Chi Minh city in the honor of Ho Chi Minh (similar to Constantine/Constantinople). By the 9th-10th century most of the common people of Constantinople probably would have no idea the city was ever known as Byzantium.
I remember playing Age of Empires 2, the byzantines had the most technologies and were also the only defensive civ, they're still my favourite. But i had no idea who or what they were, I looked online and didn't understand them.
I never even heard the word byzantine before 2008 when I played AOE2 for the first time. I remember just rifling thru a stack of CDs at my grandparents house and I came across this silver disc with a blue -ink depiction of a couple of knights. I was 11 and That moment changed the entire trajectory of my life by getting me into history
You missed out on a lot of stuff in the Balkans. Mainly, the relations between the byzantines and the bulgars, who were sometimes in war, but other times - allies. Bulgars fought during the siege of Constantinople in 721 against the arabs. Also, Bulgaria got christianized in 864 (150 years before being conquered by Byzantium), at which point the bulgar knyaz had very good relations with byzantine nobility. His son, Simeon, defeated Byzantium in several key battles (I think he married a Byzantine princess?) and declared himself "king of bulgars and byzantines", also the Byzantines were forced to pay a tribute. In 1018 Bulgaria is ultimately conquered by Byzantium. (Yes I'm bulgarian, how did you know?)
Yes basil the bulgar slayer finally ended the multi decade conflict between Byzantium and bulgars. The blinding of the conquered bulgar troops is an absolutely genius but horrific historical event
How is Rhômania (Byzantium) seen in Bulgaria? My understanding is that the Bulgars admired the Romans and sought legitimacy from Constantinople. On the other hand they were often rivals who fought over the same land.
@@okplay9446 Hey, sory to bother just reminding here, but as a Greek I would really like you opinion on how the Eastern Roman Empire is seen by our modern neighbors.
Greek logic was still used. More so than any others latin or arab state. The myths are still read. Its part of their curriculum to read Homer for the elites.
Oh yeah I'm curious of how the Achaemenid Empire really came to be. I'm really surprised Cyrus didn’t just keep the Jews as slaves still when he defeated and conquered Babylon.
The mosaics are well done technically, but their design sucks. I’ve seen mosaics in saint Peter’s basilica that are just as good technically but have a better design overall.
At 25:10 - this is straight up just not true. The slavs converted to Christianity in the 9th century while the Byzanthines briefly retook the Balkans in the 11th century for about one century until the Bulgarians revolted and re established the 2nd Bulgarian Empire in the 12th century
The Balkan population wasn't exterminated by the Huns, the average South Slav has 50-60% pre-Slavic ancestry. The Dinaric phenotype which was common in the Balkans for thousands of years is still the predominant phenotype, especially along the Dinaric Alps.
Facts, the whole idea of Hunic genocid in the Balkans stems from the belief that language is somehow linked with blood/genetics, language is a tool and changes with time who has power determens the lingustic influance If Huns did the genocid why was't is done in Italy or Greece or France where Huns were attacking
It’s very true that you don’t learn about any of this period of history in high school. From what I remember, there was some brief discussion about Ancient Greece and Rome and then it jumped forward to Columbus discovering the Americas and the start of colonialism and then focused almost exclusively on history involving America.
Usually your videos are pretty good but this one is pretty misinformed. How are you gonna credit Constantine for splitting up the empire and not talk about Diocletian? You're misinforming your audience
The plague did not kill half the empire. About 20 % of Constantinople.... Which was urban so a high percentage there and in fact came from Asia and Persia. And spread throughout Northern Europe and eventually China.. Urban trading areas were aways hardest hit.
Great episode, the only issue I have is that you keep saying "Bulgar khanate" for when the 1st Bulgarian empire fell and at that point Bulgaria had a Tsar (which comes from caesar /emperor) and was Christian for about 200 years when it fell.
I've been a lifelong lover of history, reading books and watching documentaries from a very young age, then history channel once that came on, I actually know way more about history pre 1492 then after, I love the ancient stuff, more please :).
I like what you said about medieval world being less political. It was very straightforward. Studying the medieval times taught me that history isn't linear. It can be cyclical but sometimes those cycles can be at different stages in different places. Medieval times is the definition of "shit happens". Oddly enough it proved to me that modern morality can only be the way it is from use of force and modern weapons(particularly nuclear weapons and the US Mil ind complex). Otherwise the world really operated on moreso will to power and "hey I want your shit and I'm stronger so therefore I will do it, right or wrong".
Stop calling the land "Turkey", if speaking in the historic times. Nowadays Turkey was always called minor Asia. Western half was always inhabitant by Greeks until 100 years ago.
My impression is that Byzantines were short of men constantly just because how brutal the wars they were involved in were (due to a absolutist centralised government? comparatively), while western europe (due to aristocratic feudal warfare maybe?) stayed relaitvely chill in absolute deaths numbers
So, it was because of their type of government? You sitting in a little boat in the back of the port "Look how calm are the waters here around my little boat while that jetty is bombarded by waves, it must be because it is made of rocks if only they replaced them with little boats it would be so much better." Great line of thinking.
@@manos7958 i meant that the type of government (but more like economic system) was the closest reason in the chain of logic, it had its own reasons too
@@smfcx4685 Byzantine empire collapsed because of plagues that ravaged the population of the Mediterranean. I weakened them politically, militarily and economic. The exact same thing happened to West Roman Empire.
I don't think it is fair to say that the Byzantines forgot about their Greek heritage. Classical philosophical texts were studied, particularly Plato and Aristotle's logic and it was fairly common among the elites to be aware of classical literary works. Of course, it was a deeply Christian culture but ancient retoric and philosophy where studied and adapted to their new religion.
11:10 I’m glad you mentioned that. It’s the ultimate irony that the eastern or Greek Orthodox Church has way less to do with Plato or Aristotle than the Catholics.
The Nica riots: Justinian was about to escape the palace on a Royal barge, but Theodora refused to accept skulking out like some thief and demanded Justinian stand and fight. And thus saved the Empire.
"europe has a thing for inland seas" there are some historians who argue that Europe is a giant peninsula of peninsula and this semi insular situation enabled isolated peoples of europe to trade safely since the only risky bit was on those inland seas (no sea dragons!) and meanwhile the polis/urbis/burg was basically on a mountain so much defensible. i don't know whose theory that is so let me ask an llm ai and here it is a winner is you! What an intriguing idea! The concept you're referring to is often attributed to the historian Fernand Braudel, a French historian who wrote extensively on the Mediterranean and its role in shaping European history. Braudel argued that Europe's unique geography, with its numerous inland seas and peninsulas, played a significant role in shaping the continent's development. According to Braudel, the Mediterranean Sea, in particular, was a crucial factor in the development of European civilization. He believed that the Mediterranean's relatively calm waters and proximity to the European mainland made it an ideal route for trade and cultural exchange. The Mediterranean's many peninsulas and islands also created a series of "natural" trade routes, which facilitated the exchange of goods, ideas, and cultures between different regions. Braudel's theory also highlights the importance of the European coastline's ruggedness and the presence of mountains, which made it difficult for invaders to penetrate the continent. This, in turn, allowed for the development of independent city-states and polities, which were often situated on hilltops or mountains, as you mentioned. While Braudel's work focused primarily on the Mediterranean, his ideas about the importance of geography in shaping European history have been influential in the field of historical geography. Other historians and scholars have built upon his work, exploring the ways in which Europe's unique geography influenced the development of its cities, trade networks, and cultural exchange. So, to answer your question, the theory you're referring to is often associated with Fernand Braudel's work on the Mediterranean and its role in shaping European history.
Does he even know what he's talking about in all seriousness. He confuses Emperor Heraclius for Belisarius in the one who campaigned deep into Persia to win back the eastern provinces. He also mixes up modern identifies with modern ones. Justinian wasn't a ethnic Slav he was a roman Illyrian. The Slavs didn't enter the Balkans until after Justinian died by centuries. He mixes up major details so bad that its hard to even take him seriously on the smaller ones.
Constantinople is not the most fought over city in human history, it's Jerusalem who holds that honour. You say over 30 battles were fought over Constantinople, Jerusalem was CAPTURED at least 40 times in its history and fought over something like 50 or 60 times. I'm pretty sure there are a Chinese city or two that may be able to claim the top spot I'm not sure. "The most fought over city in human history" is a bold claim.
Around 22 minutes in you say there were no cities in the Balkans. There was it depopulated by the huns. Sacked many many cities and forced survivors to migrate. Aquilea was a Balkan city sacked by huns who descendants founded venice.
Aquilea is not in the balkan region. Balkan sea/Balkan region. The sea gets it’s name from the Balkan Pensinsula which gets its name from the Balkan mountains.
Well first off, it was a miracle that the ERE lasted as long as it did especially became still relevant by the year 1000, second what he didn't mention is that the Fall of Constantinople was the reason why the Spanish King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella united Christian Spain, got rid of the last Muslims off Granada including establishing the Spanish Inquisition, the European colonization began from this, and third many scholars from Constantinople left the city to prevent Muslim persecution, went to Italy, spread the knowledge and thus The Renaissance was born.
@@jasonpalacios1363 Roman design philosophy that built bridges, houses, streets, roads, water supply, furniture, clothing, military, ports, canals, farm land, factories and so on was rediscovered in Italy. The Byzantines had all of it as well from the Romans. The Italians had to rediscover it by them self and an external body cannot do such a thing.
11:03 thats the wrongest assumption of this video wich derails a big part of someone trying to understand Byzantium as it used Greek thinking to create the christian one Edit : wth how long does this guy thinks justinian lived?
The people that inhabited the Balkans before the slav were not "Albanians" the major ones were the Illyrians, Dacians, Thracians smaller Celtic tribes and other smaller tribes definitely not "Albanians" 😂😂😂
Great summary but Byzantine art and Iconography have to be one of the most gorgeous Art styles in history, the Icon style is similar to the Japanese prints
I would say it started with Diocleatian not Constantine. The whole concept of then diocese in the Catholic church came from the Roman diocese named after Diocleatian.
You are wrong about byzantine thought. If you read the alexiad by Ana Komnena you can clearly see she was educated and influenced by the classics. Furthermore roman philosophers and scholars were the prime influences of the rennaissance. Lastly the byzantines had a literacy rate between 20-30%
Your trip about the 'iota' is inaccurate and I'm actually not sure what you think you're referring to. The iota refers to a difference between two specific Christian creeds - NOT translations of the Bible. The letter occurs as the distinction between "homoousios" and "homoiousios" meaning 'same-substance' and 'similar-substance' respectively. It's actually a very important iota. The expression 'arguing over an iota' arose later as a reference to this historical argument.
Also skipped the great byzantine libraries and how 80% of ancient knowledge comes from byzantium. When tamerlane took bursa the main thing he plundered was the great byzantine library
You can check out Agent of Byzantium too, it’s an alternate history where Mohammed became a Christian Saint instead of a warlord, and the Eastern Roman Empire survives.
You can say that Byzantine and Orthodox iconography is not very good art. But that would be adhering to certain restrictions held by your assumptions. I myself consider good art the things that are pleasing to my eye and sense of aesthetics. And under that viewpoint I consider eastern iconography to be wonderful art primarily because I like it, I like the false perspectives, the stylising promoting distinct emotive expressionism, and most of all the contrasting bling of having gold and silver leaf incorporated in to the corporeal.
If we go by Rudyard's civilizational theory Europe and America cannot mirror Rome and Byzantium because the former are one civ (western) while the latter are different (antique and orthodox respectfully) Also US is Rome, Europe is Greece
America is different because it has massive levels of resources combined with a new type of political practice. I suppose it could be loosely based on East Roman Vs West Roman.
I still call it the Roman Empire until the 7th century. That's when they replaced Latin with Greek as the official language. Constantinople was even founded as "New Rome" and renamed later. Furthermore, they recovered the old city of Rome under Justinian. They called themselves the Roman Empire and the official language and religion were pure Roman at the time, ie) Latin and Catholic.
@@hadcrio6845 Why not? What nonsense? Everything I said is true. You didn't even make an argument of any kind. I'm not sure why I'm dignifying it with a response, tbh.
You might want to explain it a little more by revising your video to fix some fundamental mistakes, such as conflating Belisarius (and Justinian) with Heraclius in the Byzantine-Sasanian War of 602-628
Love the video so far but its wrong to say at 11:00 the people who loveancient greek learning are mostly arabs because its not. Constantinope is the center of grecoroman knowledge and most of our learnings of ancient greej ideas came from the medieval romans.
How can you make a video called ‘understanding Byzantium’ when you don’t understand Byzantium yourself. You are basically just summarising Edward gibbon or other 19th century westerners describing Byzantium.
I'm impressed you managed to make a video where nearly every single minute contains like two paragraphs worth of nonsense that either gets history completely wrong or makes vacuous, absolute statement with absolutely no educational value. It's actually pretty impressive, I don't think I could get this much wrong per minute even if I tried to do it intentionally.
"What I remember about the rise of the Empire is... is how quiet it was. During the waning hours of the Clone Wars, the 501st Legion was discreetly transferred back to Coruscant. It was a silent trip. We all knew what was about to happen, what we were about to do. Did we have any doubts? Any private, traitorous thoughts? Perhaps, but no one said a word. Not on the flight to Coruscant, not when Order 66 came down, and not when we marched into the Jedi Temple. Not a word." - Operation: Knightfall "Knightfall" - Star Wars Battlefront II (2005)
I only knew about them bc of how trustworthy their coins are. You would have your hand cut off as a banker if you messed with the coins or people’s money 🤣
It's a shame no one appendage of America's Empire has the balls to pull a Byzantium. I'd say Australia lacks the imagination, entrepreneurial spirit and drive to strive for anything other then a managed decline into irrelevancy and global memehood. We've become so mired in leftist legalese due to proximity and elite infatuation with China since the 70's. Whatever chance we did have at our own civilizational greatness has long been squandered today. We're more like Carthage to China's Rome then we are Byzantium to America's Rome. Again we're thinking about Rome we are my precious...
@ItalMiser117 neither didt the Romans they banned both the pagan gods and the Olympics. And fyi the "Byzantines" never existed it's a made up propaganda term by westerners to make them self to seem like they are the inheritors of the throne of St.Constantine the Great.
‘The Byzantines stopped using Greek logic, and the people who primarily engaged with Ancient Greek ideas were western Europeans’ this is so outrageously wrong when you consider that everything the west knows about the ancient Greeks came from Byzantium in the 1200s Do not listen to this guy in anything he says about Byzantium or Eastern Europe.
28:22 My brother in Christ, Emperor Justinian was not an ethnic slav, but rather a Latinized Thracian. The northern balkan border of the Eastern Roman Empire was thoroughly Romanized and was Latin speaking rather than greek because of the quantity of roman armies that were stationed there for many centuries, hence the origins of the Romanians, a latin roman people in a sea of slavs.
He doesn't seem to have a timeline of events
Actually he was illyrian also he calls the ancient people of the balkans "Albanians" which is even more stupid :'D
@@zanny7819Agreed, he jumps all over the place and I felt that he didn't even explain the basics of Byzantine society that well
@@koboldgeorge2140 he doesn't even mention civil roles crippling the empire but instead attributes the fall to simply geography? The Byzantines had amazing geography. On east there were the Armenian and Taurus mountains that blocked off movement into Anatolia . While on the west border there was the Adriatic, Danube and Carpathian mountains. The problem of the Byzantines wasn't external threats directly, moreso internal forces that prevented competent dealings with external threats.
@@MarcoS-ow3gs No he does not, he just said that illyrian are acnestors of Albanians.
“Warfare in the Middle Ages depended heavily on how many aggressive barbarians inside your own boarders you could recruit for your army.” Exactly why I love this era and one of my favorite whatifalthist quotes.
My Syrian ancestors have been living in Syria as Orthodox Christians since the Byzantines. I’m descended from a branch that immigrated over during the Ottoman persecution of WW1. Love the Byzantines 😃
Really? I thought you people are Muslims.
It wasn't just persecution, it was genocide.
So that’s why THEY are going after you and the other Christians in the Middle East.
I humbly await your presentation of "Explaining Judaism".
Hehehe gotta thangs to explain..😂❤ but fr when I found out the Talmud was codified 500 years after Christianity I was very surprised.
It aint coming
Usury and all the world's grand wars and abuses like the VOC/Bank of England colonialism to keep the banksters happy is the super short version.
It’s gonna get ugly when you realize the Exile by the Romans is well deserved.
He won’t do it. He’s either a coward, or he’s paid off.
Rather than saying that the Byzantine Empire was a story of a slow decline (not untrue) the important point is that they are the ultimate survivors from classical antiquity and that their tools of survival were exactly a distinctive roman political culture, military and diplomacy which was completely lost in the West and had to be reinvented.
@@lourencoxbfragoso that’s not compatible with the western superiority complex, unfortunately
@@wodzisaww.5500as a Roman Catholic, I can also assure you that it is particularly not compatible with modernism, since the idea of an advanced civilization that was a heavily theocratic society is haram lol. As a papist, I wish the eastern Roman Empire survived.
Not reinvented reintroduced by the Irish ..
@@wodzisaww.5500 Who created the modern world? it wasnt you lot.
@@nodruj8681 it wasn’t you lot either. The delusion is strong with this one.
Bro blended the story of Justinian with Heraclius lmaoo
LOL! Homie mixed up the era of Justinian with the era of Heraclius.
That is such a huge fuck up that one should seriously consider remaking the whole video.
As a Muslim, I think it is wrong that the Ottoman Turks made the Hagia Sophia, the greatest Orthodox church in world history, into a masjid (mosque). It was not right for Mustafa Kemal to make it a museum in the 1930s or for Erdogan to restore the jamii masjid in 2020 either. One day, Inshallah (God willing), the Greeks will have their church back in Istanbul (Constantinople).
I like this guy!
Yes it is a historical crime.
You're compassion is refreshing... though it goes against Islamic teachings of not letting Christian churches be rebuilt... may I ask: "Why are you a Muslim?" and also: "Why do you remain Muslim?". How much do you know of Christianity? Especially Holy Spirit Filled Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity... Where Jesus died for your sins to save you from Hell...
@@MechMan2076 Umar (R.A.A.) preserved the church in Damascus; why couldn’t Mehmet “Fatih” do the same? Sheikh Imran Nazar Hossein’s interpretation of the events of 29 May 1453 and their aftermath do have some influence on me. The Ottomans are no longer my heroes, although they are better than the Kemalists and the Wahhabis. Furthermore, I am very happy being a Muslim, and it is written in the Holy Qur’an in Surah Maidah (5:82) that, “And thou wilt find the nearest of them in affection to those who believe (to be) those who say: Lo! We are Christians. That is because there are among them priests and monks, and because they are not proud.” In light of this passage, I am of the understanding that the Ummah (the international Muslim community) must treat Orthodox Christians such as the Greeks, Armenians, and Russians with a much higher level of compassion and empathy, as we near the time of the Dajjal (the Antichrist). I cannot say the same thing about Evangelicals and perhaps Western Christians in general, who, please pardon my language, are in bed with the Zionist menace. Peace.
Damn bro, I'm surprised 😮
But yeah I agree, I think it would be a big disrespect to Islam if say European colonizers turned the mosques into Christian churches.
28:24 Justinian was definitely not a Slav, he was a Dacian or a Thracian who was Greek and Latin speaking and a devout Christian
Okay people he calls it turkey to establish the place in a modern context . He didn’t at any point say it was called turkey back then. Jesus 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Exactlyyyyy. People can’t stop to think for one second why someone is doing or saying something a certain way. As long as you know what land he’s talking about, it doesn’t matter what he calls it
The irony is that when they "correct" him, they aren't even using the correct spelling Turkiye 😂
You can cry greek.You are always loser.
Left hemisphere dominance. Criticise spelling and nit pic
18:50 cataphract means fully armored
The way this guy just uncritically uses these arbitrary categories cracks me up 😂 calling the byzantines a "mixed capitalist and socialist" economy is fucking nuts, like they were some kind of medieval scandinavia
Ive listened to most of these podcasts up to this point, and i have to say i see why this guy is popular. He does a good job relating the broad strokes of a nations and period in a way where it feels relevant to the modern day. What ive noticed is that on the topics where im not so knowledgeable (spanish empire, or wwi for examples), he sounds very informed and persuasive, but when i listen to him talk about things im more knowledgeable in, such as rome, byzantium or ancient greece, it comes across as nearly childish caricature.
From what i know, this guy's main thing is political commentary, so id like to share a couple things id like to see from this channel if the goal is really to provide quality historical information. 1) i do think that the self professed goal bridging of anthropology and history is a worthy one. To that end, id like to gear more about the anthropological frameworks youre working in, so that when youre discussing history i can see how youre putting the pieces together. 2) be more specific about the history youre discussing. In most of these videos, you only mention figures by name when they do something significant, and you reify trends and processes as though they just magically transpire. Usually historians illustrate trends by talking about specific individuals or events that illustrate or exmplify the process theyre talking about. This is also a great way to tie in the anthropology angle! 3) the guy """interviewing""" beeds to do some level of preparation. Any level. At all. In all these videos i dont think ive heard him ask a single question, he just kind of nods and moves you along to the next thing. Give him an outline of what youll be lecturing on beforehand, have him read the wikipedia page of the topic, anything just so that theres actually some kind of dialogue going on
I think you two honestly have good chemistry, and i think you personally have a good presentation style, but these are some pretty glaring problems in my opinion. I took the time to write this because i like the idea behind this channel, and its something that not many other people are doing, in terms of trying to draw together these big picture historical images.
Dude just wanted to say, I respect the effort you put in this comment !
Literally haven't ever studied byzantium myself but just from hearing about them I remember detail that he doesn't, after supposedly reading books on them.
Fumbled this one bad
Solid, constructive criticism.
You are really downplaying the importance of the "Byzantine Empire".
Firstly, the term "Byzantine" is a modern invention and is historically inaccurate. It is the Eastern Roman Empire, and after the "fall" of the WRE, it simply was THE Roman Empire, all the way up until the capture of Constantinople by the Turks in the 15th century.
Secondly, the ERE was not "Greek", at least not at the level of authority and societal elites. By the time Constantinople was founded in 324 AD, Greece had already been a part of the empire since 146 BC. At the point of the official split between East and West (in 395 AD), the culture of the elites was thoroughly "Greco-Roman". They all spoke both Latin and Greek. They were mostly Christian. The two cultures were completely and inseparably intertwined. In fact, the ERE (as most of the notable and wealthy Italian elites had already emigrated permanently to the East by the end) was MORE Roman than the WRE by its downfall, as since after "Crisis of the Third Century" and Diocletian's military reforms the Western Roman elite were essentially roaming warlords with very little connection to the common people and had their own "legionary culture" as they were a completely separate military caste at that point.
The Eastern Roman Empire shielded Europe for a millennium (literally). If not for the bulwark of Constantinople, the Sassanids, Bulgars, Arab-Muslims, Mongols...all could or would have conquered the Balkans and attempted to push farther into Western Europe far, far before the Turks were able to do in the 15th-18th centuries. Without the defense and leadership (Roman emperor Alexios Komnenos initiated the First Crusade) of Eastern Rome, the West as we know it would never have form as quickly and relatively peacefully as it did, or very well could have been overrun.
Good written. I made similar comment in the same time.
Latin influence was mostly gone by the 9th century. Byzantines were latinphobes from time to time from then on
Actually the Muslims went into the Iberian Peninsula and into France but Charles Martel AKA The Hammer defeated the Muslims and then went into the Iberian Peninsula until 1492.
In several sources i have read in primary form (Greek), Byzantine is used as a geographic adjective. Anna Komnena especially uses it a lot, for the city walls, the city inhabitants etc. They wanted to show their Greek knowledge so the term Byzantintine instead of Constantinopolitan was considered classy.
@@GG-wf6cb Byzantium was the name of the city prior to Constantine re-building and re-naming it. In Vietnam we have a modern example; the "original" and historical name of the city of Saigon is Saigon, but after the communist takeover they re-named it Ho Chi Minh city in the honor of Ho Chi Minh (similar to Constantine/Constantinople).
By the 9th-10th century most of the common people of Constantinople probably would have no idea the city was ever known as Byzantium.
I remember playing Age of Empires 2, the byzantines had the most technologies and were also the only defensive civ, they're still my favourite. But i had no idea who or what they were, I looked online and didn't understand them.
same
i played the games as a kid and only grew to knew it properly when i was in secondary school
I never even heard the word byzantine before 2008 when I played AOE2 for the first time. I remember just rifling thru a stack of CDs at my grandparents house and I came across this silver disc with a blue -ink depiction of a couple of knights. I was 11 and That moment changed the entire trajectory of my life by getting me into history
Byzantine was a Roman Latin civilisation that developed into a Greco-Roman empire.
You missed out on a lot of stuff in the Balkans. Mainly, the relations between the byzantines and the bulgars, who were sometimes in war, but other times - allies. Bulgars fought during the siege of Constantinople in 721 against the arabs. Also, Bulgaria got christianized in 864 (150 years before being conquered by Byzantium), at which point the bulgar knyaz had very good relations with byzantine nobility. His son, Simeon, defeated Byzantium in several key battles (I think he married a Byzantine princess?) and declared himself "king of bulgars and byzantines", also the Byzantines were forced to pay a tribute. In 1018 Bulgaria is ultimately conquered by Byzantium.
(Yes I'm bulgarian, how did you know?)
Yes basil the bulgar slayer finally ended the multi decade conflict between Byzantium and bulgars. The blinding of the conquered bulgar troops is an absolutely genius but horrific historical event
How is Rhômania (Byzantium) seen in Bulgaria? My understanding is that the Bulgars admired the Romans and sought legitimacy from Constantinople. On the other hand they were often rivals who fought over the same land.
The Byzantines the last of the Romans vs the Bulgars, the last of the Huns.
@@baselius662 I'd love to respond, but I don't have time right now. Hopefully I'll remember to do so in a few days.
@@okplay9446 Hey, sory to bother just reminding here, but as a Greek I would really like you opinion on how the Eastern Roman Empire is seen by our modern neighbors.
Greek logic was still used. More so than any others latin or arab state. The myths are still read. Its part of their curriculum to read Homer for the elites.
@@majorianus8055 this contradicts his narrative of Anglo and western supremacy.
Was waiting for this one! Thanks!
Do the First Persian Empire, Achaemenid Empire of Persia or the Achaemenid Empire plz 🙏
Oh yeah I'm curious of how the Achaemenid Empire really came to be. I'm really surprised Cyrus didn’t just keep the Jews as slaves still when he defeated and conquered Babylon.
Ouch, talking crap about the icons hurt me. The byzantines were amazing muralists, idk how you thought the icons were ugly
Personally I don't like them, but the mosaics are amazing.
He admitted his background in an iconoclastic religion, how could expect otherwise 😂
The mosaics are well done technically, but their design sucks. I’ve seen mosaics in saint Peter’s basilica that are just as good technically but have a better design overall.
At 25:10 - this is straight up just not true. The slavs converted to Christianity in the 9th century while the Byzanthines briefly retook the Balkans in the 11th century for about one century until the Bulgarians revolted and re established the 2nd Bulgarian Empire in the 12th century
The Balkan population wasn't exterminated by the Huns, the average South Slav has 50-60% pre-Slavic ancestry. The Dinaric phenotype which was common in the Balkans for thousands of years is still the predominant phenotype, especially along the Dinaric Alps.
Facts, the whole idea of Hunic genocid in the Balkans stems from the belief that language is somehow linked with blood/genetics, language is a tool and changes with time who has power determens the lingustic influance
If Huns did the genocid why was't is done in Italy or Greece or France where Huns were attacking
Awesome vid drop, just as i was playing as Byzantium in Europa Universalis IV.
Justinian was not a slav
Can we get a Pre-Islamic Persia episode please?
It’s very true that you don’t learn about any of this period of history in high school. From what I remember, there was some brief discussion about Ancient Greece and Rome and then it jumped forward to Columbus discovering the Americas and the start of colonialism and then focused almost exclusively on history involving America.
Usually your videos are pretty good but this one is pretty misinformed. How are you gonna credit Constantine for splitting up the empire and not talk about Diocletian? You're misinforming your audience
Thumbs up. Real name the Greek "Diocles". Latinized later.
Furthermore he just blended Justinians story and Heraclius story together
The plague did not kill half the empire. About 20 % of Constantinople.... Which was urban so a high percentage there and in fact came from Asia and Persia. And spread throughout Northern Europe and eventually China.. Urban trading areas were aways hardest hit.
You confused Belisarius with Heraclius.
But how did the fall of constantinople affect lebron's legacy
Great episode, the only issue I have is that you keep saying "Bulgar khanate" for when the 1st Bulgarian empire fell and at that point Bulgaria had a Tsar (which comes from caesar /emperor) and was Christian for about 200 years when it fell.
I've been a lifelong lover of history, reading books and watching documentaries from a very young age, then history channel once that came on, I actually know way more about history pre 1492 then after, I love the ancient stuff, more please :).
I like what you said about medieval world being less political. It was very straightforward. Studying the medieval times taught me that history isn't linear. It can be cyclical but sometimes those cycles can be at different stages in different places. Medieval times is the definition of "shit happens". Oddly enough it proved to me that modern morality can only be the way it is from use of force and modern weapons(particularly nuclear weapons and the US Mil ind complex). Otherwise the world really operated on moreso will to power and "hey I want your shit and I'm stronger so therefore I will do it, right or wrong".
Stop calling the land "Turkey", if speaking in the historic times. Nowadays Turkey was always called minor Asia. Western half was always inhabitant by Greeks until 100 years ago.
Cry greek .We live 1400 years here.
@@OrkYiyen
"It's not a shawarma, it's a gyro!"
[A Greek troll]
You live only 600 years here. @@OrkYiyen
@@OrkYiyenyou are indeed an ancient nation with a long documented presence in the area!
Many Turks by this point are Ethnically Greek Muslims.
Please cover the bronze age collapse/ sea peoples.
My impression is that Byzantines were short of men constantly just because how brutal the wars they were involved in were (due to a absolutist centralised government? comparatively), while western europe (due to aristocratic feudal warfare maybe?) stayed relaitvely chill in absolute deaths numbers
No. They faced the black plague which devastated the Mediterranean world and put them into decline.
So, it was because of their type of government?
You sitting in a little boat in the back of the port "Look how calm are the waters here around my little boat while that jetty is bombarded by waves, it must be because it is made of rocks if only they replaced them with little boats it would be so much better."
Great line of thinking.
@@manos7958 i meant that the type of government (but more like economic system) was the closest reason in the chain of logic, it had its own reasons too
@@smfcx4685
Byzantine empire collapsed because of plagues that ravaged the population of the Mediterranean. I weakened them politically, militarily and economic. The exact same thing happened to West Roman Empire.
Please do a video explaining post-ww2 Europe (reaction to ww2, european integraton etc.)
I think he's made about 4 explaining modern civilization post-ww2. In fact one is even called "explaining modern civilization". So there's that...
@@Chris-es3wf it's not specifically for Europe
I don't think it is fair to say that the Byzantines forgot about their Greek heritage. Classical philosophical texts were studied, particularly Plato and Aristotle's logic and it was fairly common among the elites to be aware of classical literary works. Of course, it was a deeply Christian culture but ancient retoric and philosophy where studied and adapted to their new religion.
just finished decline of the roman empire this second! wow!
11:10 I’m glad you mentioned that. It’s the ultimate irony that the eastern or Greek Orthodox Church has way less to do with Plato or Aristotle than the Catholics.
Please do an "Explaining the Ottoman Empire" video
Drop the Judaisim video NOW mfer 😤
The Nica riots: Justinian was about to escape the palace on a Royal barge, but Theodora refused to accept skulking out like some thief and demanded Justinian stand and fight. And thus saved the Empire.
"europe has a thing for inland seas" there are some historians who argue that Europe is a giant peninsula of peninsula and this semi insular situation enabled isolated peoples of europe to trade safely since the only risky bit was on those inland seas (no sea dragons!) and meanwhile the polis/urbis/burg was basically on a mountain so much defensible. i don't know whose theory that is so let me ask an llm ai and here it is a winner is you! What an intriguing idea!
The concept you're referring to is often attributed to the historian Fernand Braudel, a French historian who wrote extensively on the Mediterranean and its role in shaping European history. Braudel argued that Europe's unique geography, with its numerous inland seas and peninsulas, played a significant role in shaping the continent's development.
According to Braudel, the Mediterranean Sea, in particular, was a crucial factor in the development of European civilization. He believed that the Mediterranean's relatively calm waters and proximity to the European mainland made it an ideal route for trade and cultural exchange. The Mediterranean's many peninsulas and islands also created a series of "natural" trade routes, which facilitated the exchange of goods, ideas, and cultures between different regions.
Braudel's theory also highlights the importance of the European coastline's ruggedness and the presence of mountains, which made it difficult for invaders to penetrate the continent. This, in turn, allowed for the development of independent city-states and polities, which were often situated on hilltops or mountains, as you mentioned.
While Braudel's work focused primarily on the Mediterranean, his ideas about the importance of geography in shaping European history have been influential in the field of historical geography. Other historians and scholars have built upon his work, exploring the ways in which Europe's unique geography influenced the development of its cities, trade networks, and cultural exchange.
So, to answer your question, the theory you're referring to is often associated with Fernand Braudel's work on the Mediterranean and its role in shaping European history.
Does he even know what he's talking about in all seriousness. He confuses Emperor Heraclius for Belisarius in the one who campaigned deep into Persia to win back the eastern provinces. He also mixes up modern identifies with modern ones. Justinian wasn't a ethnic Slav he was a roman Illyrian. The Slavs didn't enter the Balkans until after Justinian died by centuries. He mixes up major details so bad that its hard to even take him seriously on the smaller ones.
Have there been more battles for Constantinople or Jerusalem?
Jerusalem got captured/recaptured about 44 times. Constantinople got besieged 36 time and only 4-6 of them being successful.
Constantinople is not the most fought over city in human history, it's Jerusalem who holds that honour. You say over 30 battles were fought over Constantinople, Jerusalem was CAPTURED at least 40 times in its history and fought over something like 50 or 60 times. I'm pretty sure there are a Chinese city or two that may be able to claim the top spot I'm not sure. "The most fought over city in human history" is a bold claim.
Around 22 minutes in you say there were no cities in the Balkans. There was it depopulated by the huns. Sacked many many cities and forced survivors to migrate.
Aquilea was a Balkan city sacked by huns who descendants founded venice.
Aquilea is not in the balkan region. Balkan sea/Balkan region. The sea gets it’s name from the Balkan Pensinsula which gets its name from the Balkan mountains.
Well first off, it was a miracle that the ERE lasted as long as it did especially became still relevant by the year 1000, second what he didn't mention is that the Fall of Constantinople was the reason why the Spanish King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella united Christian Spain, got rid of the last Muslims off Granada including establishing the Spanish Inquisition, the European colonization began from this, and third many scholars from Constantinople left the city to prevent Muslim persecution, went to Italy, spread the knowledge and thus The Renaissance was born.
No. The Renaissance in the west happened because the used Roman philosophy of design.
@@Art-is-craft No it was because the scholars from Constantinople spread it to the Italian Peninsula.
@@jasonpalacios1363
Roman design philosophy that built bridges, houses, streets, roads, water supply, furniture, clothing, military, ports, canals, farm land, factories and so on was rediscovered in Italy. The Byzantines had all of it as well from the Romans. The Italians had to rediscover it by them self and an external body cannot do such a thing.
@@Art-is-craft And they rediscovered it from the refugees from Constantinople.
@@Art-is-craft they got helped from the refugees
Eastern Orthodoxy ☦️ for the WIN 🎉
@26:00 by that definition we do still use diplomacy all the time 😂
Byzantium time.
11:03 thats the wrongest assumption of this video wich derails a big part of someone trying to understand Byzantium as it used Greek thinking to create the christian one
Edit : wth how long does this guy thinks justinian lived?
😅 28:20 Justinian was a Slav?
Can you do one about Venice?
The people that inhabited the Balkans before the slav were not "Albanians" the major ones were the Illyrians, Dacians, Thracians smaller Celtic tribes and other smaller tribes definitely not "Albanians" 😂😂😂
It’s simplified for people who aren’t nerds like us
@@Mon_Idle calling them albanian is not a simplification but just wrong
Surprised no mention of the Book series Belisarius, by David Drake and Eric Flint.
Some quite fun historical fiction
33:57 this is Heraclius not Belisarius
Mostly enjoyed this, but hearing you say that the culture that created Hagia Sophia lacked artistic creativity was a new low.
Great summary but Byzantine art and Iconography have to be one of the most gorgeous Art styles in history, the Icon style is similar to the Japanese prints
I would say it started with Diocleatian not Constantine. The whole concept of then diocese in the Catholic church came from the Roman diocese named after Diocleatian.
You are wrong about byzantine thought. If you read the alexiad by Ana Komnena you can clearly see she was educated and influenced by the classics. Furthermore roman philosophers and scholars were the prime influences of the rennaissance. Lastly the byzantines had a literacy rate between 20-30%
Your trip about the 'iota' is inaccurate and I'm actually not sure what you think you're referring to. The iota refers to a difference between two specific Christian creeds - NOT translations of the Bible. The letter occurs as the distinction between "homoousios" and "homoiousios" meaning 'same-substance' and 'similar-substance' respectively. It's actually a very important iota. The expression 'arguing over an iota' arose later as a reference to this historical argument.
Can you do a video about the Atlantic Slave Trade?
That was covered in the African Slave Trades video which was the video before the last one.
@@captainwilhelm9657 ty
Can you do a video on the English civil war?
Also skipped the great byzantine libraries and how 80% of ancient knowledge comes from byzantium. When tamerlane took bursa the main thing he plundered was the great byzantine library
You can check out Agent of Byzantium too, it’s an alternate history where Mohammed became a Christian Saint instead of a warlord, and the Eastern Roman Empire survives.
Constantine was from Augusta Trevorum in modern day Trier Germany
you forgot the intro
NOTA BENE: The Byzantine Empire belies the term "Dark Ages" and all thenegative assumptions made there in.
"in the Eastern Roman empire that nearly happened" (re: Germanic Praetorians).
brb gott ta res my Mamaluks and Janissaries
You can say that Byzantine and Orthodox iconography is not very good art. But that would be adhering to certain restrictions held by your assumptions.
I myself consider good art the things that are pleasing to my eye and sense of aesthetics. And under that viewpoint I consider eastern iconography to be wonderful art primarily because I like it, I like the false perspectives, the stylising promoting distinct emotive expressionism, and most of all the contrasting bling of having gold and silver leaf incorporated in to the corporeal.
Me using basic dyplomacy (giving money to homeless people to beat up my enemies)
Please do a episode on the 30 years war and the ottomans and napoleon
Europe is the new Rome
America is the new Byzantium.
This is how I see the disintegration of the western civilization.
If we go by Rudyard's civilizational theory Europe and America cannot mirror Rome and Byzantium because the former are one civ (western) while the latter are different (antique and orthodox respectfully)
Also US is Rome, Europe is Greece
@@smfcx4685there are less differences between Ancient Greece and Byzantium than between Europe and America
Not true because China is going to an economic downturn right now.
America is different because it has massive levels of resources combined with a new type of political practice. I suppose it could be loosely based on East Roman Vs West Roman.
I thought the big use of Greek fire was against the Rus?
And I have never heard anyone claim that Greek fire was made using “oil”….
I still call it the Roman Empire until the 7th century. That's when they replaced Latin with Greek as the official language. Constantinople was even founded as "New Rome" and renamed later. Furthermore, they recovered the old city of Rome under Justinian. They called themselves the Roman Empire and the official language and religion were pure Roman at the time, ie) Latin and Catholic.
They weren’t Roman, stop the nonsense.
@@hadcrio6845 Why not? What nonsense? Everything I said is true. You didn't even make an argument of any kind. I'm not sure why I'm dignifying it with a response, tbh.
@@tuckerprice5521 They were Roman in a beginning but they fastly turned Greek only.
@@hadcrio6845 That's exactly what I said. What's your problem?
Do the Albanian Empire next
The whar
That would be a great special for april the first
I would say the Taj Mahal is more beautiful and impressive compared to the haghia sophia
Hello is anybody out there ? ☺️⏰🧠
57:21 absolutely based same
You are confusión people!!! It's called ROMAN EMPIRE! TURKEY? What are you talking about? Turkey only appeared in the 20th century.
It is common to call the Italian peninsula Italy, Mesopotamia Iraq, Ceylon Sri Lanka, etc.
Not Roman Empire
@@50gens Turkey is not an ancient historical region. It should rather be called Anatolia .
Hes giving people the modern name so they know what he is talking about
@@nothingelse1520 I remember learning that The Byzantin Empire was a made up.name, I felt betrayed by my teachers.
And I thought my starting of the videos was weird 😂😂
39:00 LOL love the fact that sport fans almost burned down one of the biggest empirers in history lol
Jerusalem was fought over more than 30 times. What metric are you using to count "fought over".
You might want to explain it a little more by revising your video to fix some fundamental mistakes, such as conflating Belisarius (and Justinian) with Heraclius in the Byzantine-Sasanian War of 602-628
Anti icon but pro oatmeal huh
You said Assyrians or Isaurians?
Protestant cope. ☦️☦️☦️☦️
Love the video so far but its wrong to say at 11:00 the people who loveancient greek learning are mostly arabs because its not. Constantinope is the center of grecoroman knowledge and most of our learnings of ancient greej ideas came from the medieval romans.
How can you make a video called ‘understanding Byzantium’ when you don’t understand Byzantium yourself. You are basically just summarising Edward gibbon or other 19th century westerners describing Byzantium.
Why the description says - "addassdaddaa" come on
I'm impressed you managed to make a video where nearly every single minute contains like two paragraphs worth of nonsense that either gets history completely wrong or makes vacuous, absolute statement with absolutely no educational value. It's actually pretty impressive, I don't think I could get this much wrong per minute even if I tried to do it intentionally.
"What I remember about the rise of the Empire is... is how quiet it was. During the waning hours of the Clone Wars, the 501st Legion was discreetly transferred back to Coruscant. It was a silent trip. We all knew what was about to happen, what we were about to do. Did we have any doubts? Any private, traitorous thoughts? Perhaps, but no one said a word. Not on the flight to Coruscant, not when Order 66 came down, and not when we marched into the Jedi Temple. Not a word." - Operation: Knightfall "Knightfall" - Star Wars Battlefront II (2005)
I only knew about them bc of how trustworthy their coins are. You would have your hand cut off as a banker if you messed with the coins or people’s money 🤣
Can't wait for history of russia!
Dude, it is not pronounced Ktzesifon (Iranian capital in iraq), it starts with a zza sound (same as in pizza)
It's a shame no one appendage of America's Empire has the balls to pull a Byzantium. I'd say Australia lacks the imagination, entrepreneurial spirit and drive to strive for anything other then a managed decline into irrelevancy and global memehood. We've become so mired in leftist legalese due to proximity and elite infatuation with China since the 70's. Whatever chance we did have at our own civilizational greatness has long been squandered today. We're more like Carthage to China's Rome then we are Byzantium to America's Rome. Again we're thinking about Rome we are my precious...
What is this white supremacy bs xD
@@Peak_Aussieman Interesting thought
what is bro yapping about
20:53 well they couldn’t have been that tough considering they lost and were victims of genocide by the Huns
He obviously doesn't understand the Greek East
but he understands the roman east
@ItalMiser117 Roman/Greek east is the same thing.
Is like saying that the Roman Empire had a Latin Western part and a Greek Eastern part.
@@GeorgiosLeo not the same thing. Byzantines didn't believe in the olympic gods or held olympic games.
@ItalMiser117 neither didt the Romans they banned both the pagan gods and the Olympics.
And fyi the "Byzantines" never existed it's a made up propaganda term by westerners to make them self to seem like they are the inheritors of the throne of St.Constantine the Great.
Easy to digest, crash course history. Awesome
‘The Byzantines stopped using Greek logic, and the people who primarily engaged with Ancient Greek ideas were western Europeans’ this is so outrageously wrong when you consider that everything the west knows about the ancient Greeks came from Byzantium in the 1200s
Do not listen to this guy in anything he says about Byzantium or Eastern Europe.
@@wodzisaww.5500 I ain’t reading all that
@@Browdehthats not even that long of a comment, jesus christ how brainrotted are you?
@@Browdeh it’s a sentence.