"What do we do about the Goths?" "Don't worry. The Byzantines will kill them." "But then what do we do about the Byzantines?" "Don't worry. The Francs will kill them." "But then what do we do about the Francs?!?!?" "That's the best part. Come winter, they'll all die of dysentery!"
@@shareem1779 First the Persians and Byzantines kicked each other's asses, and Arabs invaded at the most ideal time for their advantage as each military power was already severely weakened by war, famine & plague.
Rome wasn't fully restored not because of treachery, enemy armies or economic failures, but because of a plague. Justinian the Great did his best, but his restoration of the empire was not meant to be.
Tbh Justinians restoration of rome was literally what destroyed much of what was once rome The shattering and disintegration of culturally roman buildings and lands to be better used for the war effort against the barbarians basically was what created the medieval age we know
@@cometmoon4485 the romans inspired Wonderfull empires like the (russian Empire...the holi roman Empire etc) and thity things like the shit mosoloni was diong
Yes! And mostly because of caesar. This man achieved so much and was so great that he created a whole new title that didnt exist. (Kaiser/tsar) He was not a king, he was caesar!!!
Theudebert: Shows up out of nowhere with a massive Frankish army. Defeats both the Ostrogoths and Romans, led by one of the greatest generals in history. Refuses to elaborate. Dies of Cholera. Truly a Chad among Chads.
Justinian I: Retake the empire, my child Belisarius: You won't betray me once I do, right? Justinian I: ... Belisairus: *You won't betray me once I do, right?* The problem was Justinian was known as "the Great". If he was known as the Supreme Leader, he would've been immortal
when crusaders sacked constantinople in 1204 they opened his golden coffin in the church of holy apostles. they were spooked by seeing his intact body in the coffin. still they looted everything and no one knows where the body has gone.
A plague then a civil war then a 30 year war with the other superpower of their age and then finally the rise of Islam. I suppose as Rome was fated to rise as an Empire so too was it fated to fall. The Kingdom of Heaven wasn't to be.
I wonder what would have happened if Justinian was just slightly more patient. After having taken north Africa, Sicily, corsica, and Sardinia, invest in them, build them up, re-romanize them. Except for the Adriatic sea this would given them complete control of the Mediterranean Sea. After that, the southern boot of Italy would be ripe for naval troop landing pincer movements.
The defeat of the Vandals came rather very quickly and must have made Justinian overconfident in retaking the rest of the former WRE. Belisarius was really lucky in catching the Vandals off guard and capturing Carthage.
@@joshuascafidi3851 Justinian's Wars of Reconquest didn't happen just cause he was gun-hoe to reconquer the West. He used very clever moves to begin them. For instance, the Vandals deposed Hilderic, a Pro-Roman King (who was the Grandson of Valentinian III) & once the Vandal's refused to restore him, he sent Belisarius to deal with them & many expected him & his Army to suffer the same fate as the men in the 468 expedition Italy was the same, the Goths hated the Pro-Roman Queen Amalasuntha & murdered her, prompting Justinian to attack there & in all honestly the Reconquest of Italy was going INCREDIBLY smooth until Belisarius's officers began to disobey his orders which caused the Sack of Mediolanum in 539 & for the War in Italy to slowly become a slugfest, causing Belisarius to become enraged when he heard about the treaty that Justinian & the Senate gave to the Goths, when he nearly had the Goths beaten, causing lots of effects. The attack on Spain was due to opportunity as well, a Visigothic Civil War helped the Romans regain most of the former province of Baetica The plague & the Persians breaking their peace with the Romans is what mainly caused alot of setbacks. Justinian was already 51 when the Reconquest began, he wanted to be alive to see the Reconquest of the West
@@joshuascafidi3851 I think most of Justinian's court officials would be content with keeping the territories you mentioned and not going to war any further with the other Germanic kingdoms (Visigoths, Ostrogoths and Franks), because in the context of the 6th Century they really have no good reason to go to war in the West, other than finding some excuse to restore the glory of Old Rome. The Sassanids in the east had always been the more pressing matter. Afaik the Germanic kings still recognized the Emperor as their superior
The notable work “Chronographia” of Michael Psellos (Psellus), prominent Byzantine Historian and Imperial Courtier to several Byzantine Emperors (11th century), is one of the best accounts and series of biographies from emperor Basil II to Nikephoros III. A unique and valuable source on the history of the 11th century Byzantine Empire. Truly, a historic and academic treasure.
Watch the portuguese Reconquista! the spanish one doesn’t matter, they took way to long to achieve it. by this amount of time it hardly counts as a reconquest.
Only the Germanic tribes called Eastern Romans ''Byzantine'' The first use of the term “Byzantine” to label the later years of the Roman Empire was in 1557, when the German historian Hieronymus Wolf published his work, Corpus Historiæ Byzantinæ, a collection of historical sources. Justinian called himself a Roman Emperor!!!
Justinian: "Now that Rome is ours again, nothing will stop us from restoring the Roman Empire to its full glory!" 😎 Plagues, Franks and Sassanid: *Awaken begins to play*
@@uncleflagzz decades after. 5 dead Ukrainians for every 1 dead Russian each time they launch an offense. If there's no one left, who will fight for Ukraine. Definitely not Americans
Also, I am glad you included Diocletian's tetrarchy here by mentioning that what would be the Empire's permanent split in 395 had begun actually with Diocletian himself - establishing the borders (between the eastern and western empires) in the 290s AD.
The Eastern Roman empire was the Roman empire itself not a continuation not a successor. Justinian, Heraclius, and Basil were as Roman as Trajan, Hadrian, and Constantine
@@gdchannel1357 Romans already started to get influenced by Greeks when they conquered Macedonia in 2nd century BC, and Christianity had been adopted prior to the division of the empire
"But the Byzantines did not understand this as a transfer of the capital; they conceived it as the transfer of the imperial rule, of basileia, to their city, to their land, thus ACTUALLY CREATING A NEW STATE. First and foremost, they considered themselves as descendants of Constantine the Great and not of Alexander the Great, David or Augustus." Malatras, C. (2009) ‘The perception of the Roman heritage in 12th century Byzantium’ Rosetta 7.5: 1-8
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Franks were next vanished, not by any army or fourth invader, but by a brutal outbreak of dysentery" Normies: Oregon Trail People of culture: *Mediolanum Trail* This is exactly why we keep warning people to stop dissin' Terry. Terry had enough!
I love Byzantium. I love Belisarius. I love the efforts of the Reconquest and its sucess in Africa. Ive been waiting for this moment for 3 years thank you knowledgia!!
One of the most thrilling historical novels set in the Byzantine Greek Empire during the last Siege of Constantinople is “The Dark Angel” (original title Johannes Angelos), by prominent Finnish writer, Mika Waltari. Truly epic.
@@morsecode980 Let me explain. Its pretty obvious that an army of Turcotrollls are trying their best to disassociate the modern Greeks from their ancestors mostly for geopolitical purposes. It's actually rintikulus since in their very own language the ethnonym "Rum" is a synonym of "Yunan", with both translating in English as... "Greek'(! lol), but they are aiming a wider international audience that lacks proper knowledge about this part of the world, its people and its history.
Belisarius should have accepted the Goth's offer of being Western Emperor. While his loyalty to Justinian was extremely noble, Empress Theodora really put in the Emperor's mind that his loyal subject would betray him even before the offer. After the tragic events in Milan you could clearly see Justinian's gamble to retake Italy really condemned the Eastern provinces to the Sassanid Empire. Never leave a porus border for your greatest rival to exploit & to take your best economic mint - Antioch Justinian in my opinion should have been called "The Controversial" given how much people have debated his flawed legacy as of recent videos like Epic History TV covering Belisarius's campaigns
@@The_Honcho That was the literal case for the Umayyad commander, Muhammad Ibn al-Qasim. When he was done with his conquests in India the new Caliph in Syria called him back to have him executed (he didn't state it, but he knew because it was his old enemy), and the mad lad obeyed the order.
02:31 - I've never heard "Corsica" pronounced that way. All the pronunciation videos and audios I've found so far on Google emphasize the "Cor" not the "sic".
Considering how Justinian's reign is around what's often accepted as the time of the historic King Arthur (as per the dates stated in the Welsh Annales), one wonders if the Emperor's re-conquest attempt could be the original source of the story of Arthur and the other Britonian kings marching on Rome? The story called the Emperor "Lucius", but it could've easily been Justinian--Arthur and Co essentially telling him to back off and stay out of Britain, Or Else.
*Fun fact:* The conquest of Rome by the byzantines was depicted in the 1968 german-italian film "The Last Roman", in which Constantibe is played by the legendary Orson Wells. The movie depicts his relationship with Theodora in a pretty similar way to the tragic marriage of Emperor Claudius and Messalina, as Justinian appears a man sickly obsessed with building christian temples in order to honor Christ while Theodora is portrayed as a pagan nymphonaniac who has s*x with every man she considers worthy of her beauty
There was no “Byzantine Empire”. What happened in the 5th century was the collapsed of the western half of the empire. The eastern half of the Roman Empire ruled from Constantinople continued to flourished for another 1,000 years.
The devastation wreaked on Italy as a result of the Gothic wars was a major cause of the decline of civilization in the west and the onset of the Dark Ages.Much infrastructure was damaged beyond repair,there was famine and disease everywhere and general depopulation.Had the Ostrogothic kingdom as established by Theodoric the Great been allowed to continue this may not have happened.The Ostrogoths continued the legacy of Rome continuing most of the Roman institutions.The vacuum left allowed the Lombards to gain Italy and they were far less civilized than the Goths.
Ostrogoths also weren't more civilized than Lombards. They were hired by Rome to genocide lombards and were complete savages. Lombards are a people of extraordinary grace
bro you want some ideas for new content . just type "might of cholas south india " . my man medieval indian subcontinent is a place to be afraid of . i loved your warfare stories they are epic . i recommend you to look into it . the three kingdoms who ruled for more thn 2000 years , " cholas , cheras and pandyas
Agathias Scholasticos (530-582 AD) one of the principal historians of Justinian's reign between 552 and 558, at some point in his work compares the bravery of Belisarius and his soldiers with that of Leonidas and the 300. The historian borrows a piece from the history of the Laconians, as he refers to them, in order to praise the general and his deeds.
Also, in those years huge climatic problem shelled the earth. It was so disasterous that many lives passed away because of unusual cold. Even in summer it was snowing. Imagine how to deal with that?
Justinian, the last Latin emperor, his generation the last of the Romans, had one dream, a dream undone by the damned black death, leaving his conquest unfinished, the treasury empty and the empire doomed to ruin
The Roman descended dynasties that ruled the Eastern Empire were still descendant of the Romans or so they believed, so it's plausible to believe that Justinian wasn't the last of the romans. And Justinian I was certainly not the last latin speaking Emperor or atleast familiar with Latin.
@@miguelpadeiro762 Correct, however the emperors or emperor that followed may have been a native Greek speaker, Justinian II was familiar with latin and used it espescially in court. You could probably make an arguement whether Justinian II was a native latin speaker since he was born in Illyria which at the time had alot of latin speaking romans living there. Plus Vigilantia, Justinian II mother, has been referred as a thraco-roman and so it's very possible for Justinian II to have learnt latin through his mother or simply taught by a teacher.
There's an amazing comic about the Fall of the Western Empire and the re-conquest of Rome by the byzantines called "Amiculus", in which the eastern romans, after taking the city, try to find out the fate of Romulus Augustulus while the last days of the boy as emperor are shown through flashbacks. Loved the way Orestes was portrayed here as a maniac obsessed with maintaining the Empire no matter what
Justinian THE GREAT was simply UNmatched. He WAS the Byzantine Empire - at its apex. He not only extended it but completely reformed and restructured Constantinople from within after successfully putting down a slew of deadly riots. Then he went on to rebuild the Hagia Sofia. The depletion of much of his resources and manpower was beyond his control due to an unprecedented plague. He was simply the best.
The Byzantine Empire was officially called the Empire of the Romans, not the Greeks, Hellenes, or whatever. And if we proceed from the northern theory of the formation of the state, then we could not know about the Hellenic Greeks, Venetian-Venets in any way due to the lack of direct contacts. At that time, the word “Hellene” among the Romans meant a pagan and a traitor. Attila Kagan of the Huns from the kind of Velsung Kindle Edition by Соловьев Сергей Юрьевич (Author)
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212 "The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language." Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'." Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268 In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)] In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)] "As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS." (see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically. But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted. To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy. Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ. Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410 In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name. Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia. Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge. Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority. Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world. Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion. Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
Correct, the east was a part of the Roman Empire, when the west unfortunately dissolved the east didn’t just immediately change their identity and name to Byzantine, they were still the other half of the once larger Roman Empire, considered themselves Romans because they were and then like in this video attempted to reclaim the west to make Rome whole again. The term Byzantine was not even created until 1557 104 years after the last trace of the Roman Empire was erased by the ottomans in 1453. Regardless of what section of the Roman Empire continues to exist the side closer to Greece was still under the Roman Empire Umbrella
Justinian the great is a Roman, they always considered themselves as romans, it was in recent centuries that they started calling them byzantine to define certain different cultures
Love the channel, but the Vandals weren't entirely blindsided. One of the reasons why they lost so quickly was because the majority of the Vandal forces were in Sardinia, putting down a byzantine-funded revolt. Also, I know many historians call the Eastern Roman Empire - Byzantine Empire, but that is incorrect. That was done to delegitimize the Eastern Roman Empire as the true successors of the Rome Empire. Also, Belisarius gave John specific orders not to take Ariminum but did so anyway. Belisarius found out and sent his famed Bucellarii to tell John to abandon the city but instead of doing so, he took them and added them to the garrison instead. Enraged by John's continued insubordination, Belisarius wanted to leave John to his fate, but with Narses persuasion, he thought, why should good soldiers die? Also, he could rub it into John's face. Fun fact: John never thanked Belisarius for saving his life. He thanked Narses instead. This led to a considerable delay in the campaign as John continued to never listen to Belisarius and only to Narses. Fun fact: The reason Belisarius's men sacked Neapolis so severely was not that they were told to but because many of the soldiers under Belisarius's command during the siege were mostly mercenaries and foederati and wanted to let out some stress. The more disciplined soldier had been sent to other places at that time. Fun fact: Many historians have debated the idea that Narses might have been sent by Justinian to join Belisarius on his gothic campaign to undermine in an attempt to peg Belisarius down a notch. End - Cool vid keep them coming
Skanderbegs success was only due to the mountainous terrain his troops were hiding in. Skanderbeg delayed ottoman expansion for several years but his troops were eventually conquered by the ottomans.
Vandals fell very quickly and Justinian thought the same will be with ostrogoths but war with them lasted for 20 years exhausting Byzantine empire. You should also mention in your video the possessions in spain that were retaken from Visigoths
No shit. Byzantium took some small places in the south of Spain, only to lose them shortly after by the same empire that took Syria and Lebanon from Byzantium: the Umayyads. Or are you going to deny that the Iberian peninsula was invaded by the Umayyads? No Spanish historian mentions that 4 cities in southern Spain were conquered by the Byzantine Empire, for 4 days.
Roman Empire itself was a Greco-Roman project. Even before the split of the empire they were two zones of influence in the Empire the Latin West and the Greek East, which were in countless games of power on who is predominant (specially after the Great Schizm). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_East_and_Latin_West
Got home paid off, auto paid off, gold, silver, crypto (on cold wallet storage), credit cards paid off, cash for emergencies, solar backup supply food, water, and most of all, Jesus ..and many priests on the batline. Investment is the key. Thank you Jeremiah. Peace be with you, your family and your cute doggie, Nugget.
Isa ka ba sa mga nagtatanong o minsan naiinis sa mga gantong post 💢 Mahal ka ng Diyos, namatay siya para sa ating mga kasalanan 💢Bakit ba itong mga Christian na ito paulit ulit nalang ng pag share ng salita ng Diyos paulit ulit nalng nilang sinasabi na mahal ako ng Jesus na yan, 💢Na namatay daw siya para sa akin na kaylangan kong magsisi sa mga kasalanan na nagagawa ko Ehh gumagawa naman ako ng mabuti bakit paulit ulit nalang sila nakakasawa na, 💥Gusto mong malaman kung bakit paulit ulit nalang ang gantong karaming post sa socialmedia, Kase paulit ulit nating nirereject ang Diyos paulit ulit nating siyang tinatanggihan, Kuya ateh hindi nakakahiya ang mag church ang sumamba sa Diyos o maniwala sa kanya, o ang magdasal. Mas nakakahiya iyong mga kasalanan na ating nagagawa, literal na nakakahiya kase bakit natin patago ginagawa. Sabi sa verse na ito (Ang Mangangaral 12:13) Sa kabila ng lahat ng ito, isa lamang ang aking masasabi: Matakot ka sa Diyos at sundin mo ang kanyang mga utos sapagkat ito ang buong katungkulan ng tao. 💥At kaya paulit ulit si Lord sa mga gantong mga paalala kase totoo iyong pagmamahal niya sa atin, 💥Kaya kung one day matagpuan natin iyong sarili natin sa impiyerno hindi tayo tinulak ng Diyos papunta doon tayo ang pumili nito, ❤️Kaya kung hanggang ngayon nakakakita ka pa rin ng mga post na nagsasabing mahal ka ng Diyos, magsisi at tumalikod ka sa kasalanan na ginagawa mo isang pagkakataon yun nabinibigay ng Diyos hindi lang para sayo kundi pa rin sa akin kase tao lang din ako. Isa rin iyong patunay na hindi ka nakakalimutan ng Diyos, kase noong namatay siya sa krus kasama ka sa dahilan...
I will forever be indebted to you you've changed my whole life continue to preach about your name for the world to hear you've saved me froma huge financial debt with just little investment, thanks so much Mrs. Kathy Wilson
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
I thought it was well-known. We don't need a random “Roderick” to tell us what was what. Greek people never left their place within Greece in the last 6000 years as far back as we know from the first-Greeks, the Mycenaean Mainlanders and Minoan Islanders which essentially the mixing of the two, gave us the Greeks. I leave aside the places we settled outside the Greek mainland, like Crimea, Bactria, Alexandria, and even Corsica after the fall of Constantinople. The fact we as Greeks kept calling ourselves “Romans” as recently as early 19th Century was simply an incorrect name only and nothing more. Once we recovered from the darkness, obscurantism the Ottomans plunged the area in, we recovered in all aspects for good. We re-adopted our rightful heritage with the help of our remarkable Scholars in 20th Century who became as big Heroes as some of our best Strategists, Hegemons, Politicians, Philosophers, Scientists, and Fighters in earlier times.
@@RootGroves-hl8kt yes you are right we are both Romans and Hellenes in one. We have both Ellinismo and Romiosini. Their is nothing wrong with this. We are the heirs of both Ancient Greece and Rome
Nice! Your videos should be seen by more watchers. May I repost your channel without changing anything on the clean platform named Ganjing World? Thank you!
It’s actually only a couple of Turks with multiple accounts. They are psychologically traumatized that they mostly descend from Byzantine Greek ancestors so try hard to deny that byzantines were Greeks or that Greeks exist at all. Turks ideology is “Turkish Nationalism” which is heavily anti-Greek, demeans Greeks as a lower people, while subsequently romanticizing their own pure Turkish descent and bloodline which they believe originates back in Central Asia. So finding out that they are themselves mostly Greek really gives the ardent Turkish nationalists a complex.
I wonder if byzantine empire successful to retake Italy under Greek culture and language, is this bad news for latin civilization? I wonder what Italian people though on this
greek culture? greek culture didn't exist anymore except the theory stuff the greeks always had (poets, philosophers, greek food influence). the rest was roman. poltiics, military, provincial system, calendar, religion
@@ItalMiser117 isn't language is the biggest part of a human culture? What the east roman spoken language? If you have low IQ to determine so I don't blamed you, I don't rebutting to low IQ peoples
@@ItalMiser117 first of all Orthodox Christianity is the first one to emerged under east Romans not west... And also ancient architecture, alphabet are first emerged in East Europe then west Europe spread it towards west Europe. The reason is because east Europe like Greece is closed to the middle east were many invented beguns like sculpture from Messopotamians, alphabet from Phoenicians etc... The Greeks adopted it and they spread through European especially west Europe
@@hiphop24-s3s Exactly. That's why eastern orthodoxy is roman as catholicism. The term "roman catholic" and "greek orthodox" are wrong. Both should be called roman. The bishop of constantinople even has ROME in his. name. I'm pretty sure that byzantine architecture is roman as well. Not one greek building (except some "building" from 1500bc like a hill) had rotundas or domes. That was a roman invention. After some time, romans used domes very frequently for their churches and buildings. Of course roman architecture was influenced by greek architecture as well but not domes (hagia sophia, san vitale in ravenna).
Hellenes as they were called, were persecuted by the enforcement of these general rules; Justinian endeavored, above all things, to deprive them of education, and he had the University of Athens closed in 529; at the same time ordering wholesale conversations. The Cambridge Medieval History volumes 1-5 by John Bagnell Bury, Paul Dalen (Goodreads Author) (Editor)
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212 "The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language." Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'." Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268 In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)] In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)] "As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS." (see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically. But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted. To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy. Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ. Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410 In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name. Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia. Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge. Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority. Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world. Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion. Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
Who would ever call Justinian "the Great"? Belisarius is 1000x more worthy of that title had he taken the title of Western Roman Emperor, but didn't. What even warrants the "some would call" disclaimer? Rome is not my specialty at all, just trying to figure out what context I'm missing that would make me consider Justinian a good emperor let alone a Great one.
He wasn't just about reconquering land. He was also about the revival of Artistic Culture that flavorished during his rule. He also had built the greatest Church that had ever been seen at the time. His law codex are also a big help in what we use today for our own laws
Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority. Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world.
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212 "The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language." Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'." Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268 In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)] In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)] "As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS." (see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically. But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted. To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy. Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ. Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410 In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name. Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia. Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge. Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority. Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world. Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion. Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
@@vandare6913 Eastern romans never called themselves greek they shunned the hellenic culture the eastern roman empire was not always ruled by greeks its founder constantine was an illyrian it had a syriac dynasty khazar dynasty and so on
@Constantine VII LOL. Korais was a liberal democrat of the late 18th century who was ideologically opposed to any type of monarchism and absolutism and fervent supporter of the French revolution of 1789, which he actually viewed at first hand. He tried to connect the Greeks of his times solely with the ancient classical Greek democratic ideals and also tried as hard as possible to disconnect them from the autocratic monarchical (as he viewed them) Byzantines. He was a highly educated intellectual for his times, but he was in fact a merchant by profession and surely NOT A HISTORIAN by any means. There are famously also passages in his writings where he reluctantly admits that the Byzantines were Greeks in ancestry and speech and even refers to them as "Graikoromaioi" - "Grecoromans", but he considered them as degenerate ultra-religious autocrats (due to the brain-washing of the contemporary western European historiography which generally disrespected Byzantium, see Gibbon's opinions on Byzantium) and tried to disconnect the Greeks of the late 18th century from any non-liberal - non-democratic past. It was a PURELY IDEOLOGICAL AND NOT really a HISTORICAL issue for him. And surely it was not the majority opinion of most Greeks at the time. Most Greeks and even the "Filiki Etairia", the secret organization with thousands of members that organized the Greek revolution of 1821, clearly aimed to revive the Byzantine empire with a monarch as a ruler and Konstantinoupolis as its capital, calling it a Greek (Hellenic) empire. Many influential figures of the time (if not the majority) clearly thought of themselves as descendants not only of the ancient Hellenes but also of the Byzantines whom they also considered Hellenic. Yet you picked the opinions of an ideologist liberal merchant of the 18th century WHO WAS NOT EVEN A HISTORIAN in order to supposedly propagandize against the Greekness of the Byzantines... LOL
00:37 Not commonly called "Byzantine" but spitefully called "Byzantine" by the western fallen part, to discredit the Greeks Legal Right to that title . Some things should not be forgotten. Like it or not Greek speaking people(and the Greek cultute) held the empire for another 1000(!!!) years.
Hello, I am commenting from Iran. A few days ago, a 22-year-old girl named Mehsa Amini was killed just because she did not wear a hijab! And because of this, there are protests in Iran. But the officers resist. Ask your governments for help. Here, the internet is cut off around night, and Instagram and WhatsApp work with filters.
As the Crusaders demonstrated in the Fourth Crusade in Constantinople, the Franks or Germanic tribes would have crushed those Greeks or Byzantines. It was just their time, just like the Italics/Romans had their time.
I know the Goths are a genuine tribal group/ethnicity with their own unique culture, beliefs and ideals, but whenever I hear the term on the channel I always imagine a bunch of depressed all-black-claded teenagers smoking cigarettes acting indifferent to the Romans.
@@alexwhite3830 I just think of an ethnic tribe then lol. Maybe it's just cause I watch too much South Park but I can't help of think of depressed all-black wearing teenagers when I think of the term "goth." It makes the video super funny when you imagine it that way but obviously I know it's not actually relevant to the rl history.
@@richyrich6099 Yeah. But for me vandals is the most amusing thing. To do something so even after 1 and a half thousand years people would still keep mentioning your name in a negative way
The map at the beginning of the video is almost totally wrong...Urbinum, Firmum and Auximum are northernmost, on the territory called Marche, and not in Umbria. Ariminum (Rimini) was southernmost and Picenum is the ancient name of Marche and not a city.
Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion. Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212 "The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language." Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'." Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268 In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)] In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)] "As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS." (see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically. But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted. To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy. Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ. Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410 In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name. Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia. Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge. Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority. Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world. Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion. Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
Thank you for pointing out it was still the Roman Empire. It was not separate. There was never an official split between the two halves. It is like saying a successful invasion of the west coast to the Mississippi during WW2 means the Eastern part of the country us not the United States. The Byzantine label is a fake one historians use, not something at the time. The Roman Empire lasted all the way to the 1400s.
Over a period of decades, changing weather patterns and poor harvests weakened the Western Roman empire more than anything else. Throw in poor leadership, costly and often unnecessary expenses draining the treasury (such as the occupation of what is now Britain, which was never profitable) and changes in Roman society itself (upbringing, religion, population decline). These all resulted in the inability of Rome to keep the Western empire together.
The Qur'an includes the Surat Ar-Rum, the sura dealing with "the Romans", sometimes translated as "The Byzantines," reflecting a term now used in the West. These Romans of the 7th century, referred to as Byzantines in modern Western scholarship, were the inhabitants of the surviving Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire. Since all ethnic groups within the Roman empire had been granted citizenship by 212 AD, these eastern peoples had come to label themselves Ρωμιοί or Ῥωμαῖοι Romaioi (Romans), using the word for Roman citizen in the eastern lingua franca of Koine Greek. This citizenship label became "Rûm" in Arabic. The Eastern Roman, or Byzantine, Empire traced its origin as an institution to the foundation of Constantinople as the new capital of the Roman Empire in 330 by Constantine the Great. The Byzantine Empire survived the 5th century, when the Western Roman Empire fell, more or less intact and its populace continually maintained that they were Romaioi (Romans), not Hellenes (Greeks), even as the empire's borders gradually became reduced to in the end only encompassing Greek-speaking lands.
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212 "The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language." Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'." Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268 In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)] In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)] "As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS." (see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically. But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted. To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy. Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ. Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410 In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name. Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia. Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge. Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority. Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world. Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion. Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
Very confusing. Are repeated reference to "the Romans" meant to designate the Byzantines? Since they were attacking the Western (based in Rome) Empire, it was always jarring.
The word ' Hellene ' in the Byzantine period just meant ' pagan ' . The Byzantines called themselves ' Romaioi ' , the successors of the Roman empire ; they did not want to have anything to do with the ancient pagan Greek religion . Hokwerda, H., 2021.. Constructions of greek past. Groningen: Forsten, p.261.
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212 "The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language." Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'." Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268 In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)] In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)] "As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS." (see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically. But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted. To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy. Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ. Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410 In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name. Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia. Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge. Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority. Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world. Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion. Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
@Constantine VII Constantine Porphyrogennetos is, if I'm not mistaken, THE ONLY emperor in almost a thousand years who personally tried to directly connect himself with the ancient Latin-speaking Romans and the geopolitical reasons are pretty obvious, since he was the Basileus ton Romaion and naturally first and foremost promoted the Roman imperial ideology and identity at a period when western rulers promoted themselves as the rightful heirs of the Roman Imperial ideology and referred to him and his subjects as Greeks. He even wrote that there had been no Hellenes at all on ethnic terms but only in religious (idolaters) and referred to the Maniots of Pelopónnisos as descendants of the "older Romaioi", meaning the ancient Spartans! LOL
@Constantine VII "…That in the race of us the Hellenes, wisdom reigns" ‘ὅτι τε ἐν τῷ γένει τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἡμῶν ἡ σοφία βασιλεύει’ Emperor John III Doukas Vatatzes (1193-1254) to Pope Gregorio IX "the HELLENIC RACE looms over all other languages" "every kind of philosophy and form of knowledge is a discovery of Hellenes […]. What do you, O Italian, have to display?" 'Ἁπασῶν γλωσσῶν τὸ ἑλληνικὸν ὑπέρκειται γένος… Πᾶσα τοίνυν φιλοσοφία καὶ γνῶσις Ἑλλήνων εὕρεμα… Σὺ δὲ ὦ Ἰταλέ, τίνος ἕνεκεν ἐγκαχαῦσαι;’ Theodore II Laskaris (1254-1258), Christian Theology, 7 f.
If the Romans stopped at just the Reconquest of the Italian peninsula, will the imperial family have enough money left in the treasury to pay their troops to prevent Maurice from being usurped and the war with Shah Khosrow II from happening?
"What do we do about the Goths?"
"Don't worry. The Byzantines will kill them."
"But then what do we do about the Byzantines?"
"Don't worry. The Francs will kill them."
"But then what do we do about the Francs?!?!?"
"That's the best part. Come winter, they'll all die of dysentery!"
I think dysentery functions here as an historical cheat code.
The simpsons will forever serve as a source of wisdom. :D
they crapped themselves to death bwahahahaha
Leave the Goths to the Arabs
The Plague Of Justinian literally broke out at the worst possible time. If it hadn't happened, Rome may very well have recovered.
Western Europe sucks.
or it happened at the best possible time for maximum impact
no the persians kicked ass
@@shringletringle7021 no the arabs kick ass
@@shareem1779 First the Persians and Byzantines kicked each other's asses, and Arabs invaded at the most ideal time for their advantage as each military power was already severely weakened by war, famine & plague.
Rome wasn't fully restored not because of treachery, enemy armies or economic failures, but because of a plague. Justinian the Great did his best, but his restoration of the empire was not meant to be.
Tbh
Justinians restoration of rome was literally what destroyed much of what was once rome
The shattering and disintegration of culturally roman buildings and lands to be better used for the war effort against the barbarians basically was what created the medieval age we know
someone listened to The Rest is History 😉
Can someone hop in a time machina and teach the Byzantine soldiers handwashing and give them face masks please i want ROME BACK
Also proper cleaning and tools necessary
Let's be clear, if Justinian ruled 50 years earlier or later, the reconquests would probably fair better
the Roman empire served as an inspiration to various other empires later in history
And the Roman Empire itself was heavily influenced by older cultures like Greece and Mesopotamia. History is amazing
@@cometmoon4485 the romans inspired Wonderfull empires like the (russian Empire...the holi roman Empire etc) and thity things like the shit mosoloni was diong
Yes! And mostly because of caesar. This man achieved so much and was so great that he created a whole new title that didnt exist. (Kaiser/tsar)
He was not a king, he was caesar!!!
*Canada looks at his brother U.S United Kingdom*
Portuguese Empire
Theudebert: Shows up out of nowhere with a massive Frankish army. Defeats both the Ostrogoths and Romans, led by one of the greatest generals in history. Refuses to elaborate. Dies of Cholera. Truly a Chad among Chads.
Theudebert the Chad invaded because he could, and he did. That's Sigma Mindset.
Justinian I: Retake the empire, my child
Belisarius: You won't betray me once I do, right?
Justinian I: ...
Belisairus: *You won't betray me once I do, right?*
The problem was Justinian was known as "the Great". If he was known as the Supreme Leader, he would've been immortal
Get off your high horse, Kim.
Kim jun un= 69999999999999 morbillion is🧠🧠🧠🧠🧠🧠🧠🧠🧠🧠
when crusaders sacked constantinople in 1204 they opened his golden coffin in the church of holy apostles. they were spooked by seeing his intact body in the coffin. still they looted everything and no one knows where the body has gone.
@@saikrishnak8631 Really Damn
@@saikrishnak8631 i heard that they threw his body into the ocean
God was watching Eastern Rome and saw they were doing good so he set the difficulty on Legendary
yeah
by ading islam
@@achour.falestine and a plague
A plague then a civil war then a 30 year war with the other superpower of their age and then finally the rise of Islam.
I suppose as Rome was fated to rise as an Empire so too was it fated to fall. The Kingdom of Heaven wasn't to be.
@kuro saigatsu thats cool but what about joe
I wonder what would have happened if Justinian was just slightly more patient. After having taken north Africa, Sicily, corsica, and Sardinia, invest in them, build them up, re-romanize them. Except for the Adriatic sea this would given them complete control of the Mediterranean Sea. After that, the southern boot of Italy would be ripe for naval troop landing pincer movements.
The defeat of the Vandals came rather very quickly and must have made Justinian overconfident in retaking the rest of the former WRE. Belisarius was really lucky in catching the Vandals off guard and capturing Carthage.
@@Theophan123 agreed, but what do you think of the "what if" part of my post?
@@joshuascafidi3851 Justinian's Wars of Reconquest didn't happen just cause he was gun-hoe to reconquer the West. He used very clever moves to begin them. For instance, the Vandals deposed Hilderic, a Pro-Roman King (who was the Grandson of Valentinian III) & once the Vandal's refused to restore him, he sent Belisarius to deal with them & many expected him & his Army to suffer the same fate as the men in the 468 expedition
Italy was the same, the Goths hated the Pro-Roman Queen Amalasuntha & murdered her, prompting Justinian to attack there & in all honestly the Reconquest of Italy was going INCREDIBLY smooth until Belisarius's officers began to disobey his orders which caused the Sack of Mediolanum in 539 & for the War in Italy to slowly become a slugfest, causing Belisarius to become enraged when he heard about the treaty that Justinian & the Senate gave to the Goths, when he nearly had the Goths beaten, causing lots of effects. The attack on Spain was due to opportunity as well, a Visigothic Civil War helped the Romans regain most of the former province of Baetica
The plague & the Persians breaking their peace with the Romans is what mainly caused alot of setbacks. Justinian was already 51 when the Reconquest began, he wanted to be alive to see the Reconquest of the West
@@joshuascafidi3851 I think most of Justinian's court officials would be content with keeping the territories you mentioned and not going to war any further with the other Germanic kingdoms (Visigoths, Ostrogoths and Franks), because in the context of the 6th Century they really have no good reason to go to war in the West, other than finding some excuse to restore the glory of Old Rome. The Sassanids in the east had always been the more pressing matter. Afaik the Germanic kings still recognized the Emperor as their superior
Who said he didn't do all of that? Check his spendings and reforms
The notable work “Chronographia” of Michael Psellos (Psellus), prominent Byzantine Historian and Imperial Courtier to several Byzantine Emperors (11th century), is one of the best accounts and series of biographies from emperor Basil II to Nikephoros III.
A unique and valuable source on the history of the 11th century Byzantine Empire. Truly, a historic and academic treasure.
I always love a good story of reconquest like that of Justinian the Great
Watch the portuguese Reconquista!
the spanish one doesn’t matter, they took way to long to achieve it. by this amount of time it hardly counts as a reconquest.
One of the greatest men to ever live. This is just one of dozens of once a century feats he accomplished.
Only the Germanic tribes called Eastern Romans ''Byzantine'' The first use of the term “Byzantine” to label the later years of the Roman Empire was in 1557, when the German historian Hieronymus Wolf published his work, Corpus Historiæ Byzantinæ, a collection of historical sources. Justinian called himself a Roman Emperor!!!
"Keep cool and you will command everyone"
-Justinian I
Justinian: "Now that Rome is ours again, nothing will stop us from restoring the Roman Empire to its full glory!" 😎
Plagues, Franks and Sassanid: *Awaken begins to play*
The g*rms be like
"Plauge, eastern demons, arise my masters!"
Those freaking persians sabotaging everything.
You know your end is near, when most energy is used to reclaim land.
Recent example being the illustrious Ukrainian counteroffensive. The inoffensive offense of Ukraine
@@LeadLeftLeon Insane losses. And winter is coming. Great combo
@@LeadLeftLeon isn't that what Russia is doing in Ukraine? Reclaiming lost land? It's not the other way around lmao
And yet they still lasted for a thousand years more.
@@uncleflagzz decades after. 5 dead Ukrainians for every 1 dead Russian each time they launch an offense. If there's no one left, who will fight for Ukraine. Definitely not Americans
Just an observation: I saw "Germanics, Ostrogothics, Visigoths and Vandals" but they're all Germanic. As the Franks, Suebs, Gepids, Lombards etc.
It's interesting the franks adopted a latin culture.
Entire western Europe is Germanic, just like entire central Asia and Asia minor is Turkic.
Isnt there a difference between Germanic and Gothic
They fought each just as much as the Romans
@@trentfila6186 Money will do that
Also, I am glad you included Diocletian's tetrarchy here by mentioning that what would be the Empire's permanent split in 395 had begun actually with Diocletian himself - establishing the borders (between the eastern and western empires) in the 290s AD.
The Eastern Roman empire was the Roman empire itself not a continuation not a successor. Justinian, Heraclius, and Basil were as Roman as Trajan, Hadrian, and Constantine
but they were heavelly influenced by the greeks and christianity so they werent as similar as the roman empire
@@gdchannel1357 Romans already started to get influenced by Greeks when they conquered Macedonia in 2nd century BC, and Christianity had been adopted prior to the division of the empire
@@gdchannel1357 That doesn't make sense
"But the Byzantines did not understand this as a transfer of the capital; they conceived it as the transfer of the imperial rule, of basileia, to their city, to their land, thus ACTUALLY CREATING A NEW STATE. First and foremost, they considered themselves as descendants of Constantine the Great and not of Alexander the Great, David or Augustus."
Malatras, C. (2009) ‘The perception of the Roman heritage in 12th century
Byzantium’ Rosetta 7.5: 1-8
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Franks were next vanished, not by any army or fourth invader, but by a brutal outbreak of dysentery"
Normies: Oregon Trail
People of culture: *Mediolanum Trail*
This is exactly why we keep warning people to stop dissin' Terry. Terry had enough!
I love Byzantium. I love Belisarius. I love the efforts of the Reconquest and its sucess in Africa. Ive been waiting for this moment for 3 years thank you knowledgia!!
Belisarius Is overlooked and deserves a biographical film.
Read Prokopios translated by H. B. Dewing
One of the most thrilling historical novels set in the Byzantine Greek Empire during the last Siege of Constantinople is “The Dark Angel” (original title Johannes Angelos), by prominent Finnish writer, Mika Waltari.
Truly epic.
chad austrasia :
barge into the war out of nowhere
defeat both sides’ armies
die off from sickness
Based
Many bots and people copy and pasting arguments not in good faith in the comments, really puts one off from even engaging in the first place.
I have no idea why there’s so many bots posting that stuff, it’s weird
Yea, this comments section has been invaded by Turcotrolls...
@@morsecode980 Let me explain. Its pretty obvious that an army of Turcotrollls are trying their best to disassociate the modern Greeks from their ancestors mostly for geopolitical purposes. It's actually rintikulus since in their very own language the ethnonym "Rum" is a synonym of "Yunan", with both translating in English as... "Greek'(! lol), but they are aiming a wider international audience that lacks proper knowledge about this part of the world, its people and its history.
"Conquering is easy. Governing is hard." Genghis Kahn
Amazingly informative and detailed video💫🔥🔥🔥
Belisarius should have accepted the Goth's offer of being Western Emperor. While his loyalty to Justinian was extremely noble, Empress Theodora really put in the Emperor's mind that his loyal subject would betray him even before the offer. After the tragic events in Milan you could clearly see Justinian's gamble to retake Italy really condemned the Eastern provinces to the Sassanid Empire. Never leave a porus border for your greatest rival to exploit & to take your best economic mint - Antioch
Justinian in my opinion should have been called "The Controversial" given how much people have debated his flawed legacy as of recent videos like Epic History TV covering Belisarius's campaigns
Would've caused a civil war. Justinian should have named a Caesar for the west and east to succeed him
Corpus Juris Civilis would be enough to count as great even if Persia had taken the entire lands Augustus used to have.
Even if Belisarus knew what his fate would be, he would still do the same as he did originally. That’s just the man he was.
@@The_Honcho That was the literal case for the Umayyad commander, Muhammad Ibn al-Qasim. When he was done with his conquests in India the new Caliph in Syria called him back to have him executed (he didn't state it, but he knew because it was his old enemy), and the mad lad obeyed the order.
The Goths couldn't be trusted anyways, they broke their word many times.
02:31 - I've never heard "Corsica" pronounced that way. All the pronunciation videos and audios I've found so far on Google emphasize the "Cor" not the "sic".
Their presented mispronounces a lot of names. It is a very common thing on this channel.
"Belisarius, Narses, and John"
Why does this sound like the names of the participants of a Group Project in High School
Considering how Justinian's reign is around what's often accepted as the time of the historic King Arthur (as per the dates stated in the Welsh Annales), one wonders if the Emperor's re-conquest attempt could be the original source of the story of Arthur and the other Britonian kings marching on Rome? The story called the Emperor "Lucius", but it could've easily been Justinian--Arthur and Co essentially telling him to back off and stay out of Britain, Or Else.
*Fun fact:* The conquest of Rome by the byzantines was depicted in the 1968 german-italian film "The Last Roman", in which Constantibe is played by the legendary Orson Wells. The movie depicts his relationship with Theodora in a pretty similar way to the tragic marriage of Emperor Claudius and Messalina, as Justinian appears a man sickly obsessed with building christian temples in order to honor Christ while Theodora is portrayed as a pagan nymphonaniac who has s*x with every man she considers worthy of her beauty
Not often in history a unrelated third army shows up… beats up the other two army’s …..then gets diarrhea and has to leave.
There was no “Byzantine Empire”.
What happened in the 5th century was the collapsed of the western half of the empire.
The eastern half of the Roman Empire ruled from Constantinople continued to flourished for another 1,000 years.
Imagine what Belisarius could've accomplished if his own side hadn't hamstrung him so much. Great video.
The devastation wreaked on Italy as a result of the Gothic wars was a major cause of the decline of civilization in the west and the onset of the Dark Ages.Much infrastructure was damaged beyond repair,there was famine and disease everywhere and general depopulation.Had the Ostrogothic kingdom as established by Theodoric the Great been allowed to continue this may not have happened.The Ostrogoths continued the legacy of Rome continuing most of the Roman institutions.The vacuum left allowed the Lombards to gain Italy and they were far less civilized than the Goths.
The dark ages began in 200ad and were caused by Rome. First it was caused by the tax farming, and then the judeo-christian genocide
I think it lasted nineteen years.
Ostrogoths also weren't more civilized than Lombards. They were hired by Rome to genocide lombards and were complete savages. Lombards are a people of extraordinary grace
@smokeyhoodoo Wow you clearly show no bias lmao
If you knew anything you’d knew that the so called "dark ages" weren’t dark but okay
bro you want some ideas for new content . just type "might of cholas south india " . my man medieval indian subcontinent is a place to be afraid of . i loved your warfare stories they are epic . i recommend you to look into it . the three kingdoms who ruled for more thn 2000 years , " cholas , cheras and pandyas
I hope you make part 2 of Skanderbeg
The thumbnail is a bit misleading. Why are only the tribes in Galia labeled as Germanics but the Ostrogoths, the Visigoths and the Vandals not?
probably bc he was only naming the involved parties (invaders or the invaded) not everyone
A wonderful & informative introducing Thanks ( Knowledges ) channel
Nice video
Agathias Scholasticos (530-582 AD) one of the principal historians of Justinian's reign between 552 and 558, at some point in his work compares the bravery of Belisarius and his soldiers with that of Leonidas and the 300. The historian borrows a piece from the history of the Laconians, as he refers to them, in order to praise the general and his deeds.
Awesome! Thanks. 👍
Given the grand threat of the Persians in the East, the turbulence in the Balkans and the of course the plague, I think they did well.
True.
Also, in those years huge climatic problem shelled the earth. It was so disasterous that many lives passed away because of unusual cold. Even in summer it was snowing. Imagine how to deal with that?
Justinian, the last Latin emperor, his generation the last of the Romans, had one dream, a dream undone by the damned black death, leaving his conquest unfinished, the treasury empty and the empire doomed to ruin
Was Justin II not a "Latin emperor"? Latin panegyrics were written for him
The Roman descended dynasties that ruled the Eastern Empire were still descendant of the Romans or so they believed, so it's plausible to believe that Justinian wasn't the last of the romans. And Justinian I was certainly not the last latin speaking Emperor or atleast familiar with Latin.
@@comraderoyalguard4699 He was the last native speaker to rule it, what followed were native Greek speakers
@@miguelpadeiro762 Correct, however the emperors or emperor that followed may have been a native Greek speaker, Justinian II was familiar with latin and used it espescially in court. You could probably make an arguement whether Justinian II was a native latin speaker since he was born in Illyria which at the time had alot of latin speaking romans living there.
Plus Vigilantia, Justinian II mother, has been referred as a thraco-roman and so it's very possible for Justinian II to have learnt latin through his mother or simply taught by a teacher.
How you edit these vidios are so good
Very nice 👍
There's an amazing comic about the Fall of the Western Empire and the re-conquest of Rome by the byzantines called "Amiculus", in which the eastern romans, after taking the city, try to find out the fate of Romulus Augustulus while the last days of the boy as emperor are shown through flashbacks. Loved the way Orestes was portrayed here as a maniac obsessed with maintaining the Empire no matter what
Justinian THE GREAT was simply UNmatched. He WAS the Byzantine Empire - at its apex. He not only extended it but completely reformed and restructured Constantinople from within after successfully putting down a slew of deadly riots. Then he went on to rebuild the Hagia Sofia. The depletion of much of his resources and manpower was beyond his control due to an unprecedented plague. He was simply the best.
cool post!
💪
the eastern roman empire has to be the greatest empire in history
In medieval history, yes, it was the greatest and most civilized.
Funny how I just watch this on Extra Credits.
The Byzantine Empire was officially called the Empire of the Romans, not the Greeks, Hellenes, or whatever. And if we proceed from the northern theory of the formation of the state, then we could not know about the Hellenic Greeks, Venetian-Venets in any way due to the lack of direct contacts. At that time, the word “Hellene” among the Romans meant a pagan and a traitor.
Attila Kagan of the Huns from the kind of Velsung Kindle Edition by Соловьев Сергей Юрьевич (Author)
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language."
Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'."
Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268
In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)]
In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)]
"As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS."
(see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity
The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically.
But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted.
To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy.
Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ.
Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410
In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name.
Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia.
Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge.
Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority.
Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world.
Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire
After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion.
Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
@@thewarriorfrog Exactly The Greeks called themselves Roman so indeed it was still the Roman Empire
Correct, the east was a part of the Roman Empire, when the west unfortunately dissolved the east didn’t just immediately change their identity and name to Byzantine, they were still the other half of the once larger Roman Empire, considered themselves Romans because they were and then like in this video attempted to reclaim the west to make Rome whole again. The term Byzantine was not even created until 1557 104 years after the last trace of the Roman Empire was erased by the ottomans in 1453. Regardless of what section of the Roman Empire continues to exist the side closer to Greece was still under the Roman Empire Umbrella
Justinian the great is a Roman, they always considered themselves as romans, it was in recent centuries that they started calling them byzantine to define certain different cultures
You mean the German historians?
This was a great video to watch as I sit visiting Rome
Justinian, Belisarius, Constantinius, 5:00 "Hi, I'm JOHN" lol
3:37 You said Constantinius, instead of Constantinianus!
Love the channel, but the Vandals weren't entirely blindsided. One of the reasons why they lost so quickly was because the majority of the Vandal forces were in Sardinia, putting down a byzantine-funded revolt. Also, I know many historians call the Eastern Roman Empire - Byzantine Empire, but that is incorrect. That was done to delegitimize the Eastern Roman Empire as the true successors of the Rome Empire. Also, Belisarius gave John specific orders not to take Ariminum but did so anyway. Belisarius found out and sent his famed Bucellarii to tell John to abandon the city but instead of doing so, he took them and added them to the garrison instead. Enraged by John's continued insubordination, Belisarius wanted to leave John to his fate, but with Narses persuasion, he thought, why should good soldiers die? Also, he could rub it into John's face.
Fun fact: John never thanked Belisarius for saving his life. He thanked Narses instead. This led to a considerable delay in the campaign as John continued to never listen to Belisarius and only to Narses.
Fun fact: The reason Belisarius's men sacked Neapolis so severely was not that they were told to but because many of the soldiers under Belisarius's command during the siege were mostly mercenaries and foederati and wanted to let out some stress. The more disciplined soldier had been sent to other places at that time.
Fun fact: Many historians have debated the idea that Narses might have been sent by Justinian to join Belisarius on his gothic campaign to undermine in an attempt to peg Belisarius down a notch.
End - Cool vid keep them coming
Thank you for pointing out it was still the Roman Empire, not the Byzantine Empire. Rome lasted till the late 1400s
Skanderbeg part 2 when?
Skanderbegs success was only due to the mountainous terrain his troops were hiding in. Skanderbeg delayed ottoman expansion for several years but his troops were eventually conquered by the ottomans.
Part two of scanderbeg
Let's gooooooo Roman history
man it is insane how much rome changed everything becuase you can see so many differences between east rome and west rome
Vandals fell very quickly and Justinian thought the same will be with ostrogoths but war with them lasted for 20 years exhausting Byzantine empire. You should also mention in your video the possessions in spain that were retaken from Visigoths
No shit. Byzantium took some small places in the south of Spain, only to lose them shortly after by the same empire that took Syria and Lebanon from Byzantium: the Umayyads.
Or are you going to deny that the Iberian peninsula was invaded by the Umayyads?
No Spanish historian mentions that 4 cities in southern Spain were conquered by the Byzantine Empire, for 4 days.
Roman Empire itself was a Greco-Roman project. Even before the split of the empire they were two zones of influence in the Empire the Latin West and the Greek East, which were in countless games of power on who is predominant (specially after the Great Schizm).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_East_and_Latin_West
Got home paid off, auto paid off, gold, silver,
crypto (on cold wallet storage), credit cards paid
off, cash for emergencies, solar backup supply
food, water, and most of all, Jesus ..and many
priests on the batline. Investment is the key.
Thank you Jeremiah. Peace be with you, your
family and your cute doggie, Nugget.
Isa ka ba sa mga nagtatanong o minsan naiinis sa mga gantong post
💢 Mahal ka ng Diyos, namatay siya para sa ating mga kasalanan
💢Bakit ba itong mga Christian na ito paulit ulit nalang ng pag share ng salita ng Diyos paulit ulit nalng nilang sinasabi na mahal ako ng Jesus na yan,
💢Na namatay daw siya para sa akin
na kaylangan kong magsisi sa mga kasalanan na nagagawa ko
Ehh gumagawa naman ako ng mabuti
bakit paulit ulit nalang sila nakakasawa na,
💥Gusto mong malaman kung bakit paulit ulit nalang ang gantong karaming post sa socialmedia,
Kase paulit ulit nating nirereject ang Diyos paulit ulit nating siyang tinatanggihan,
Kuya ateh hindi nakakahiya ang mag church ang sumamba sa Diyos o maniwala sa kanya, o ang magdasal.
Mas nakakahiya iyong mga kasalanan na ating nagagawa, literal na nakakahiya kase bakit natin patago ginagawa.
Sabi sa verse na ito
(Ang Mangangaral 12:13)
Sa kabila ng lahat ng ito, isa lamang ang aking masasabi: Matakot ka sa Diyos at sundin mo ang kanyang mga utos sapagkat ito ang buong katungkulan ng tao.
💥At kaya paulit ulit si Lord sa mga gantong mga paalala kase totoo iyong pagmamahal niya sa atin,
💥Kaya kung one day matagpuan natin iyong sarili natin sa impiyerno hindi tayo tinulak ng Diyos papunta doon
tayo ang pumili nito,
❤️Kaya kung hanggang ngayon nakakakita ka pa rin ng mga post na nagsasabing mahal ka ng Diyos, magsisi at tumalikod ka sa kasalanan na ginagawa mo
isang pagkakataon yun nabinibigay ng Diyos hindi lang para sayo kundi pa rin sa akin kase tao lang din ako.
Isa rin iyong patunay na hindi ka nakakalimutan ng Diyos, kase noong namatay siya sa krus kasama ka sa dahilan...
I will forever be indebted to you you've changed
my whole life continue to preach about your name
for the world to hear you've saved me froma huge
financial debt with just little investment, thanks
so much Mrs. Kathy Wilson
Yes that's true
But i recommended Mrs Sophia she's really my bitcion trading manager
@@eugenemarsha Wow I' m just shock someone mentioned expert Mrs Sophia I thought I'm the only one trading with her
She helped me recover what I lost trying to trade myself
@@vivianeverleig Now with the recent economy, To get financial
freedom you have to be making money while
you're asleep
Which name do you prefer ? Eastern Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire ?
Eastern Roman Empire. It’s more accurate
Eastern Roman Empire
Eastern Roman Empire
Love the channel, when will you a video about African history?
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
I thought it was well-known. We don't need a random “Roderick” to tell us what was what. Greek people never left their place within Greece in the last 6000 years as far back as we know from the first-Greeks, the Mycenaean Mainlanders and Minoan Islanders which essentially the mixing of the two, gave us the Greeks. I leave aside the places we settled outside the Greek mainland, like Crimea, Bactria, Alexandria, and even Corsica after the fall of Constantinople.
The fact we as Greeks kept calling ourselves “Romans” as recently as early 19th Century was simply an incorrect name only and nothing more. Once we recovered from the darkness, obscurantism the Ottomans plunged the area in, we recovered in all aspects for good. We re-adopted our rightful heritage with the help of our remarkable Scholars in 20th Century who became as big Heroes as some of our best Strategists, Hegemons, Politicians, Philosophers, Scientists, and Fighters in earlier times.
@@Chaos-Nyx-Erebus Nah we are Greco-Roman.
@@RootGroves-hl8kt yes you are right we are both Romans and Hellenes in one. We have both Ellinismo and Romiosini. Their is nothing wrong with this. We are the heirs of both Ancient Greece and Rome
The latin empire that became Greek
Nice! Your videos should be seen by more watchers. May I repost your channel without changing anything on the clean platform named Ganjing World? Thank you!
I like this video but you really need to double-check your pronunciation on things. It's "CORsica," not "CorSIca"
Eventually do a series on the British Empire
I like that the are so many turks crying in the comments and saying any source they can find so they say that byzantine empire were not greek.
It’s actually only a couple of Turks with multiple accounts. They are psychologically traumatized that they mostly descend from Byzantine Greek ancestors so try hard to deny that byzantines were Greeks or that Greeks exist at all. Turks ideology is “Turkish Nationalism” which is heavily anti-Greek, demeans Greeks as a lower people, while subsequently romanticizing their own pure Turkish descent and bloodline which they believe originates back in Central Asia. So finding out that they are themselves mostly Greek really gives the ardent Turkish nationalists a complex.
I wonder if byzantine empire successful to retake Italy under Greek culture and language, is this bad news for latin civilization? I wonder what Italian people though on this
greek culture? greek culture didn't exist anymore except the theory stuff the greeks always had (poets, philosophers, greek food influence). the rest was roman. poltiics, military, provincial system, calendar, religion
@@ItalMiser117 isn't language is the biggest part of a human culture? What the east roman spoken language? If you have low IQ to determine so I don't blamed you, I don't rebutting to low IQ peoples
@@ItalMiser117 first of all Orthodox Christianity is the first one to emerged under east Romans not west... And also ancient architecture, alphabet are first emerged in East Europe then west Europe spread it towards west Europe. The reason is because east Europe like Greece is closed to the middle east were many invented beguns like sculpture from Messopotamians, alphabet from Phoenicians etc... The Greeks adopted it and they spread through European especially west Europe
@@hiphop24-s3s Exactly. That's why eastern orthodoxy is roman as catholicism. The term "roman catholic" and "greek orthodox" are wrong. Both should be called roman. The bishop of constantinople even has ROME in his. name.
I'm pretty sure that byzantine architecture is roman as well. Not one greek building (except some "building" from 1500bc like a hill) had rotundas or domes. That was a roman invention. After some time, romans used domes very frequently for their churches and buildings. Of course roman architecture was influenced by greek architecture as well but not domes (hagia sophia, san vitale in ravenna).
Hellenes as they were called, were persecuted by the enforcement of these general rules; Justinian endeavored, above all things, to deprive them of education, and he had the University of Athens closed in 529; at the same time ordering wholesale conversations.
The Cambridge Medieval History volumes 1-5 by John Bagnell Bury, Paul Dalen (Goodreads Author) (Editor)
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language."
Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'."
Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268
In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)]
In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)]
"As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS."
(see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity
The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically.
But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted.
To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy.
Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ.
Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410
In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name.
Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia.
Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge.
Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority.
Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world.
Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire
After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion.
Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
Who would ever call Justinian "the Great"? Belisarius is 1000x more worthy of that title had he taken the title of Western Roman Emperor, but didn't. What even warrants the "some would call" disclaimer?
Rome is not my specialty at all, just trying to figure out what context I'm missing that would make me consider Justinian a good emperor let alone a Great one.
He wasn't just about reconquering land. He was also about the revival of Artistic Culture that flavorished during his rule. He also had built the greatest Church that had ever been seen at the time. His law codex are also a big help in what we use today for our own laws
Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority.
Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world.
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language."
Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'."
Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268
In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)]
In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)]
"As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS."
(see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity
The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically.
But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted.
To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy.
Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ.
Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410
In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name.
Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia.
Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge.
Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority.
Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world.
Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire
After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion.
Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
@@vandare6913 Eastern romans never called themselves greek they shunned the hellenic culture the eastern roman empire was not always ruled by greeks its founder constantine was an illyrian it had a syriac dynasty khazar dynasty and so on
@Constantine VII LOL. Korais was a liberal democrat of the late 18th century who was ideologically opposed to any type of monarchism and absolutism and fervent supporter of the French revolution of 1789, which he actually viewed at first hand. He tried to connect the Greeks of his times solely with the ancient classical Greek democratic ideals and also tried as hard as possible to disconnect them from the autocratic monarchical (as he viewed them) Byzantines. He was a highly educated intellectual for his times, but he was in fact a merchant by profession and surely NOT A HISTORIAN by any means. There are famously also passages in his writings where he reluctantly admits that the Byzantines were Greeks in ancestry and speech and even refers to them as "Graikoromaioi" - "Grecoromans", but he considered them as degenerate ultra-religious autocrats (due to the brain-washing of the contemporary western European historiography which generally disrespected Byzantium, see Gibbon's opinions on Byzantium) and tried to disconnect the Greeks of the late 18th century from any non-liberal - non-democratic past. It was a PURELY IDEOLOGICAL AND NOT really a HISTORICAL issue for him. And surely it was not the majority opinion of most Greeks at the time. Most Greeks and even the "Filiki Etairia", the secret organization with thousands of members that organized the Greek revolution of 1821, clearly aimed to revive the Byzantine empire with a monarch as a ruler and Konstantinoupolis as its capital, calling it a Greek (Hellenic) empire. Many influential figures of the time (if not the majority) clearly thought of themselves as descendants not only of the ancient Hellenes but also of the Byzantines whom they also considered Hellenic. Yet you picked the opinions of an ideologist liberal merchant of the 18th century WHO WAS NOT EVEN A HISTORIAN in order to supposedly propagandize against the Greekness of the Byzantines... LOL
Leo I did send an expedition against the Vandals in 468 which didn't go well.
Only because of his idiot brother in law who stalled on landing near Carthage
00:37 Not commonly called "Byzantine" but spitefully called "Byzantine" by the western fallen part, to discredit the Greeks Legal Right to that title . Some things should not be forgotten. Like it or not Greek speaking people(and the Greek cultute) held the empire for another 1000(!!!) years.
Could you please, please do the raid on Baltimore in west Cork in Ireland in 1631CE
Belisarius rivals Napoleon in terms of strategy.
这个版图的埃及和北非部分画的太小了，西欧的意大利部分又大的比例失调了
Hello, I am commenting from Iran. A few days ago, a 22-year-old girl named Mehsa Amini was killed just because she did not wear a hijab! And because of this, there are protests in Iran. But the officers resist. Ask your governments for help. Here, the internet is cut off around night, and Instagram and WhatsApp work with filters.
7:48 so basically the Francs all got the shiits so they went home 😅
As the Crusaders demonstrated in the Fourth Crusade in Constantinople, the Franks or Germanic tribes would have crushed those Greeks or Byzantines. It was just their time, just like the Italics/Romans had their time.
My brother, the Eastern Romans killed the Europeans living in Constantinople. What will you do if your family is killed in this massacre?
I know the Goths are a genuine tribal group/ethnicity with their own unique culture, beliefs and ideals, but whenever I hear the term on the channel I always imagine a bunch of depressed all-black-claded teenagers smoking cigarettes acting indifferent to the Romans.
What do you think about when you hear the name of another german tribe aka Vandals?
@@alexwhite3830 I just think of an ethnic tribe then lol. Maybe it's just cause I watch too much South Park but I can't help of think of depressed all-black wearing teenagers when I think of the term "goth." It makes the video super funny when you imagine it that way but obviously I know it's not actually relevant to the rl history.
@@richyrich6099 Yeah. But for me vandals is the most amusing thing. To do something so even after 1 and a half thousand years people would still keep mentioning your name in a negative way
@@alexwhite3830 Oh yeah true. Sacks Rome once and suddenly vandalizing is bad lol
The map at the beginning of the video is almost totally wrong...Urbinum, Firmum and Auximum are northernmost, on the territory called Marche, and not in Umbria. Ariminum (Rimini) was southernmost and Picenum is the ancient name of Marche and not a city.
No mention of the Justinian plague?
Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire
After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion.
Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language."
Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'."
Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268
In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)]
In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)]
"As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS."
(see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity
The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically.
But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted.
To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy.
Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ.
Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410
In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name.
Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia.
Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge.
Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority.
Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world.
Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire
After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion.
Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
Thank you for pointing out it was still the Roman Empire. It was not separate. There was never an official split between the two halves. It is like saying a successful invasion of the west coast to the Mississippi during WW2 means the Eastern part of the country us not the United States. The Byzantine label is a fake one historians use, not something at the time. The Roman Empire lasted all the way to the 1400s.
@@WhydoIsuddenlyhaveahandle As a American with Greek heritage I find this analogy very good.
Interesting
This comment section is basically 3 or 4 people repeating themselves multiple times lol
Yeah it’s fucking stupid
Over a period of decades, changing weather patterns and poor harvests weakened the Western Roman empire more than anything else.
Throw in poor leadership, costly and often unnecessary expenses draining the treasury (such as the occupation of what is now Britain, which was never profitable) and changes in Roman society itself (upbringing, religion, population decline). These all resulted in the inability of Rome to keep the Western empire together.
The Italy campaign, perhaps the best example of ww2 Eastern European brutality in another setting.
The Qur'an includes the Surat Ar-Rum, the sura dealing with "the Romans", sometimes translated as "The Byzantines," reflecting a term now used in the West. These Romans of the 7th century, referred to as Byzantines in modern Western scholarship, were the inhabitants of the surviving Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire. Since all ethnic groups within the Roman empire had been granted citizenship by 212 AD, these eastern peoples had come to label themselves Ρωμιοί or Ῥωμαῖοι Romaioi (Romans), using the word for Roman citizen in the eastern lingua franca of Koine Greek. This citizenship label became "Rûm" in Arabic.
The Eastern Roman, or Byzantine, Empire traced its origin as an institution to the foundation of Constantinople as the new capital of the Roman Empire in 330 by Constantine the Great. The Byzantine Empire survived the 5th century, when the Western Roman Empire fell, more or less intact and its populace continually maintained that they were Romaioi (Romans), not Hellenes (Greeks), even as the empire's borders gradually became reduced to in the end only encompassing Greek-speaking lands.
Nicol 1992, p. ix.
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language."
Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'."
Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268
In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)]
In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)]
"As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS."
(see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity
The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically.
But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted.
To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy.
Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ.
Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410
In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name.
Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia.
Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge.
Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority.
Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world.
Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire
After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion.
Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
Can we have a video about prussia
Nice ok Your videos are beautiful That's always my support too I hope you'll notice me shout out to your vlogs idol ERWIN CAVITE TV from silan cavite.
Very confusing. Are repeated reference to "the Romans" meant to designate the Byzantines? Since they were attacking the Western (based in Rome) Empire, it was always jarring.
The word ' Hellene ' in the Byzantine period just meant ' pagan ' . The Byzantines called themselves ' Romaioi ' , the successors of the Roman empire ; they did not want to have anything to do with the ancient pagan Greek religion .
Hokwerda, H., 2021.. Constructions of greek past. Groningen: Forsten, p.261.
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language."
Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
"After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'."
Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268
In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)]
In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)]
"As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS."
(see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001).Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482:
@@vandare6913 Identity
The Byzantine ruling elite faced the outside world and its unending dangers with a strategic advantage that was neither diplomatic nor military but instead psychological: the powerful moral reassurance of a triple identity that was more intensely Christian than most modern minds can easily imagine, and specifically Chalcedonian in doctrine: Hellenic in its culture, joyously possessing pagan Homer, agnostic Thucydides, and ir reverent poets-though Hellene was a word long avoided, for it meant pagan; and proudly Roman as the Romaioi, the living Romans, not without justification for Roman institutions long endured, at least symbolically.
But until the Muslim conquest took away the Levant and Egypt from the empire, this triple identity was also a source of local disaffection from the ruling Constantinopolitan elite, for of the three only the Roman identity was universally accepted.
To begin with, the speakers of Western Aramaic and Coptic, who accounted for most of the population of Syria and Egypt, including the Jews in their land and beyond it, did not partake in the Hellenic cul ture-except for their own secular elites, which were organically part of the Byzantine regime and were indeed often attacked by nativists as "Hellenizers." For the rest, the masses either did not know that Homer ever lived, or were easily led by unlettered fanatical priests to vehe mently hate what they were too ignorant to enjoy.
Moreover, the zone that rejected Hellenism, as it had rejected the Roman habit of bathing as too sensual, also rejected the excessively intel lectual Chalcedonian definition of the dual nature of Christ, both human and divine, insisting on the more purely monotheistic conception of the single, divine nature of Christ.
Luttwak, E., 2011. Grand strategy of the byzantine empire. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard, p.410
In about 1440 John Argyropoulos wrote of the struggle for the freedom of ' Hellas ' in a letter addressed to John VIII as 'Emperor of Hellas'. We have come a long way from the days when the ambassador Liudprand of Cremona was thought unfit to be received at the Court because his credentials were addressed to the 'Emperor of the Greeks'. But 'Graeci' was never an acceptable term. George Scholarius, the future Patriarch Gennadius, who was to be the link between the old Byzantine world and the world of the Turcocratia, often uses 'Hellene' to mean anyone of Greek blood. But he had doubts about its propriety; he still retained the older view. When he was asked his specific opinion about his race, he wrote in reply: "Though I am a Hellene by birth, yet I would never say that I was a Hellene. For I do not believe as the Hellenes believed. I should like to take my name from my faith and, if anyone asked me what I am, to reply "a Christian". Though my father dwelt in Thessaly,' he adds, 'I do not call myself a Thessalian, but a Byzantine. For I am of Byzantium.' It is to be remarked that though he repudiates the name of Hellene he calls the Imperial City not New Rome or Constantinople, but by its old Hellenic name.
Runciman, S. (1970). IMPERIAL DECLINE AND HELLENIC REVIVAL. In The Last Byzantine Renaissance (The Wiles Lectures, pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In contradistinction to a Julian, an Alexander Severus, a Marcus Aurelius and even a Hadrian, who felt themselves more Greek than Latin, Justinian wished to be a Latin Roman Emperor. He was confirmed in these feelings by his horror of Hellen ism. A Roman Emperor, Justinian was also a Christian Emperor. He considered himself the pillar of the Christian orthodox faith. The Hellenic spirit is profoundly pagan and Justinian abominated it. For him, as for his contem poraries and successors, Hellene was synonymous with pagan and to call anyone by this term was to insult him. The Greek peoples themselves assumed the name Pauaio (Romans). Even to-day Romios is still used by the common people. Hellene is an artificial term revived in the nineteenth century. The capital of the Empire is called Roum by the Arab and Turkish peoples of Asia.
Lot, F., 2013. End of the Ancient World. Routledge.
Many diverse peoples and languages coexisted within the Byzantine empire (Laiou and Maguire (eds.) 1992), and although Greek was the language of government and high culture and the terms 'Hellene' and even 'Greek' were sometimes applied to themselves by educated members of the elite in Constantinople from the Comnenian period onwards (Stouraitis 2014), Byzantium was not a Greek empire and Greek was never the only language spoken. Nevertheless the Byzantines' sense of themselves rested on a shared mythology of universalism and superiority.
Linehan, P., Nelson, J. and Costambeys, M., n.d. The medieval world.
Characteristics of the Byzantine Empire
After its capital was established in the east, the empire became, in scholarly parlance, the Eastern Roman Empire. Furthermore, because Constantine and all of his successors (except Julian the Apostate, 361 63) were Christians, the empire from here on can also be called the Christian Roman Empire. As a consequence of these two changes the Roman Empire had become the Byzantine. However, though used by scholars, none of these three names was used at the time. Though the empire had its center in a Greek cultural and linguistic area, as a result of which there followed a gradual hellenization of its institutions and culture, the emperors recognized no change. The empire remained the Roman Empire and the citizens (even though Greeks came to domi nate it) still called themselves Romans. The term Hellene (Greek) connoted a pagan. The term Byzantine was an invention of Renais sance scholars after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and was never used by its contemporaries. By the middle of the seventh century Greek had become the official language of all spheres of government and the army; nevertheless the empire remained "Roman" and despite divisions of its territory at times it was always seen as a single unit. Essentially the Byzantine Empire was a combination of three major cultural components: (1) Roman in political concepts, administration. law, and military organization. (2) Greek in language and culture, and (3) Christian in religion.
Fine, J., 1991. The early medieval Balkans. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, p.16.
@Constantine VII Constantine Porphyrogennetos is, if I'm not mistaken, THE ONLY emperor in almost a thousand years who personally tried to directly connect himself with the ancient Latin-speaking Romans and the geopolitical reasons are pretty obvious, since he was the Basileus ton Romaion and naturally first and foremost promoted the Roman imperial ideology and identity at a period when western rulers promoted themselves as the rightful heirs of the Roman Imperial ideology and referred to him and his subjects as Greeks. He even wrote that there had been no Hellenes at all on ethnic terms but only in religious (idolaters) and referred to the Maniots of Pelopónnisos as descendants of the "older Romaioi", meaning the ancient Spartans! LOL
@Constantine VII "…That in the race of us the Hellenes, wisdom reigns"
‘ὅτι τε ἐν τῷ γένει τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἡμῶν ἡ σοφία βασιλεύει’
Emperor John III Doukas Vatatzes (1193-1254) to Pope Gregorio IX
"the HELLENIC RACE looms over all other languages" "every kind of philosophy and form of knowledge is a discovery of Hellenes […]. What do you, O Italian, have to display?"
'Ἁπασῶν γλωσσῶν τὸ ἑλληνικὸν ὑπέρκειται γένος… Πᾶσα τοίνυν φιλοσοφία καὶ γνῶσις Ἑλλήνων εὕρεμα… Σὺ δὲ ὦ Ἰταλέ, τίνος ἕνεκεν ἐγκαχαῦσαι;’
Theodore II Laskaris (1254-1258), Christian Theology, 7 f.
looks like Ravenna is in Venice
If the Romans stopped at just the Reconquest of the Italian peninsula, will the imperial family have enough money left in the treasury to pay their troops to prevent Maurice from being usurped and the war with Shah Khosrow II from happening?