I am the translator of the Chinese edition of Strategikon. I feel glad that KG got an entire video about Strategikon. Although this book gave me much pains, I still hold the Chinese edition of Strategikon is the most well-done of all my works. I personally add forewords, introductions and notes that contain as much words can equal to half length of Maurice's own words. The book haven't sell well for the lack of interests for ancient warfare in my country, but the work is widely recognized as a well-done translation. Hope things could be changed in the future.
@@VicmundLim I think amazon has them. George T. Dennis' translation is very well done and help me a lot. just search ‘Strategikon’ in amazon and you can find it.
@@kapoioskanenas2337 As was pointed out, Roman/Byzantine Tent Communities were pretty large. A contubernum was 8 people in one tent/tent community. And you would have to hope none of the contubernums nearby ratted you out - you had teh ultimative nosy neighbours You would need to be able to bribe all of them - wich would require a lot of gold - if they were even all bribeable. In most of the time, sleeping on guard duty actually carried the death penalty. For full roman citizens and with no appeal. Not reporting someone that had slept on guard duty was propably a serious crime as well. I would asume there are similar punishments for failing the rolecall or hiding someone that does not belong to your group.
Spy: "What's the plan?" Army: "You are to be captured, the enemy General will tell you his plan and show you around his camp, you will then escape when he leaves you to be killed in an elaborate manner by an incompetent lackey, you will also shag his daughter... that's an important part, you will also destroy their base, we will then swoop in and claim victory." Spy: "What do I get in return?" Army: "The Generals daughter, until the next film."
I think its honestly one of the most impressive things the Byzantines ever did in admitting that the unstoppable legions were a thing of the past. So many civilizations have gone on to fall because they couldn't accept the world had moved on and they needed to adapt. Byzantium recognized they didn't have the manpower, wealth or resources of the Caesars and so couldn't copy the legions without that. So they changed to focus more on cleverness and warfare management. It's incredible to think how many great empires could have survived if they had had the same mentality of adaptation.
At the time of the Strategikon, the old Legions were still there(some of them dating back to the late Republic), and the old field armies were still in existence. Despite manpower shortages in the late 6th century, the army was still quite massive, much larger than during the era of Julius Caesar, and relative to the provinces it held, much larger than the army under Augustus or Trajan. The Strategikon builds on centuries of experience from now lost(and some surviving) Roman & Greek military treatises, and the centuries of experience of the army.
@@KRYPTIA-mp4ol The definition of what it meant to be Roman changed over thousands of years, and those who are clueless about Roman history keep making the mistake in assuming that to be Roman one had to speak Latin. The Roman ethnicity progressed and went from being an ethnicity based on speaking Latin, then to Greek and Latin, and then finally Greek. They insisted on calling themselves Romans, they had preserved Roman culture and they were living in what to them was the eternal, ecumenical Roman nation. I will honor how they wanted to be seen, as ROMANS and not as Greeks. Thus I consider their ethnicity Roman, not Greek. They were Greek-speaking Romans and modern Greeks brainwashed by the Greek state will not tell the world how it should accept the Romans as being.
@wassim games Isn't more corageous then to face a mighty foe in a duel even though you are scared? To press on even when fear makes your mouth run dry and your grip shaky?
@@velveteensallet949 Also New Rome: Lets let these blood thirsty fanatically religious killers into the wealthiest city and heart of what's left of our empire.
And yet old Rome always won.... It's really interesting how much pure will power counts. I mean still Cannae is the battle with the highest number of deaths in history. Yet Rome went "nope, let's keep on fighting"
It’s often been said that the United States has perfect geography - weak neighbors to the north and south, fish to the east and west. We’re playing on easy mode. The Byzantine Empire was the opposite. Enemies in literally all eight compass directions. Playing on god mode and they STILL managed to survive ten centuries.
Yeah and everyone wanted to conquer it's land. Because it was much advanced than rest of the world in every direction and much richer. For it was greatest statehood of mankind to survive so many disasters
@@davexorus9836 People might brush you off as being a fanboy but that was the truth. The lands of the Byzantine Empire were the most productive lands around, not because the soil was particularly fertile- in fact, Anatolia is quite hilly- but because of the organised farming, tax collection, superior technology, well-oiled bureaucracy, well-preserved and maintained Roman road network and centuries of preserved knowledge ensured they were almost exploited to the best of their capacity and yielded the maximum taxes without burdening the farmers so they had surplus wealth and could contribute to the state in other ways. The more I read about the Byzantine Empire the more it feels like a modern, organised nation state stuck in the medieval period. They were just so advanced and ahead of their time. To find a fantasy equivalent the Byzantines feel like elves- strong, advanced remnants of a formerly great civilisation trying to hold out and preseve their civilisation. Being so much more advanced than everyone else givves them a unique advantage in wealth and military power but any losses are also incredibly costly and difficult to replace. They also keep shriking as time passes.
@@zippyparakeet1074 The rest of Europe suffered a decline in knowledge when the Western Roman empire fell. The Eastern Roman empire, by and large, preserved that knowledge and kept using it. That being said, I've often wondered why the Byzantine Empire never really innovated and did much scientific research. The bump in science and knowledge really came from the Islamic nations translating ancient texts and funding state-run schools. While Byzantine infighting certainly did a lot of damage to the empire, I can't help but notice that they also just didn't keep up with innovations as much. Hence why crusaders could ultimately capture and sack Constantinople.
The part about not committing to heated battles with unknown enemies is hilarious once you realize just how many times they did that very same mistake, often with tragic consequences.
Romanos IV: Strategos, what did Emperor Maurice write about getting into heated battles again? Strategos: The Strategikon says 'Absolutely do it', my lord. Wait, that's not right... Romanos IV: Yay! (rides off to Manzikert) Strategos: I'm sorry, my lord, my copy had a smudge. It actually says 'Absolutely do NOT do'... aaaaand he's gone.
@@johntitor1256 tbf, the Byzantines had been fighting the Turks already for 30 years by that point, so they can hardly be referred to as a "new" enemy.
I actually have a translated copy of this. One of the manual had a single copy found in the Swedish Royal Archives. It probably came back with a ex-member of the Vangarian Guard.
@@ElBandito I think they did. Emperor Nikephoros Phokas recommended using liquid fire against enemies of equal strength to your own troops to tip the scales in the Praecepta Militaria.
I do love this emperor, but too bad he did some mistakes. As explained in another comment, he suceeded a popular but inefficient emperor, tiberios II, so people had a really bad opinion, comparing tiberios with maurikios. Also, he didn't see or understand the fact that his army was exhausted. His soldiers refused a similar order 1 or 2 years before, but their general priscus had the courage to refuse the emperor's orders and thus, saving his life for a time. Plus, he cut soldier's pay during the middle of persian war, it's almost a miracle they didn't kill or overthrown him at this time. Still, great emperor, so many consequences with his death, Muslims world would be different if maurice hadn't been killed.
@@alex3987654 All the indirect pay cuts Maurice tried to impose (spending winter on enemy territory to ease logistical burden, being paid partly in kind rather than in cash etc), the soldiers were forced to accept anyway under Phocas and Herakleios, except this time all frontiers hard crumbled and the Empire was facing an existential struggle. It's hard to pinpoint what exactly he could have done differently, sort of disbanding half the field armies and leaving the Balkans at the mercy of the Avars and the Slavs.
@@sakdavid Don't mistaken, I really like this Emperor, was really efficient, against Persians and Avars and Tiberios II, emperor before him wasted the treasure, so I understand Maurice's position was difficult. I think he decided a far better strategy in the balkans against avars and slavs than justinian, justin ii or tiberios. Tiberios left a heavy minus to Maurice, thanks for the gift. But I think he was too focused on the money, at a moment where situation were still fragile, Empire was recovering slowly from the war (and justinian's plague didn't help). I think under Phokas and Herakleios, situation was so difficult for the empire, soldier couldn't act as they did with Maurice indeed. I don't know what I would have done if I were maurice in 580 ^^ but his death has a so big impact on the world, that's what make his death so sad... As I comment on other video, imagine Mahomet's army against Maurice's Empire and Khosrau's II empire. Arabia would speak persian or greek today xd
I don’t understand how a person can put out this much good content this often. The way u describe the battles man ... sheesh. Mans be spittin. The battles play out in a movie in mind as you’re describing. History is immersive. Kings and generals all day.
Maurice was a good emperor but far from perfect,people tend to everidealize him while they in turn overdemonized Phacas not realizing how much was his image corrupted by Heraclian propaganda.
Dear king and generals, i would just like to say thank you. I have loved history for so long and you guys have made that possible. You probably won't see this but thanks. I have watched you guys for mabey 3 years, That is almost as long as I have watched UA-cam many thanks. From Finn .
I wonder what Sun Tzu would've said about the Strategikon. Would he have taken a few lessons from it. Or would he have added to it himself if he could. Makes me wonder a lot. My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.
@Anthony Ngu There was a Domestikos of the East and Domestikos of the West at some point (also a Megas Domestikos later on), which were kind of similar. The position of Domestikos of the East had been used by particularly ambitious generals to rebel several times.
Good to see some love for Leo VI's Taktika. Not many people know that his teenaged daughter also wrote a book about how to be pointlessly irritating in 15-60 seconds, called TikToka.
The Eastern Romans, who repulsed the full might of the Caliphate twice, guarded the eastern approaches to Europe for centuries, yet are largely ignored in the West, which constantly refers to the Battle of Tours, a food-fight in comparison. Thanks for giving them their due.
Ridiculous. The battle at Tours was also important. Without it, much of Western Europe would be conquered regardless of how long the Emperor of Constantinople held back his enemies in the East. You do not need to put down one heroic action to raise another. All heroes are to be praised by all.
@@DieNibelungenliad Yeah Tours was important, but let's not forget that it took the Romans centuries to subdue their parts of Europe. The idea that all of western Europe would roll over and die just because the Franks lost at Tours is ridiculous. Yes, the Arabs managed to conquor the Middle East, but by comparison, the Middle East was actually far more easy to control. It was governed by just 2 other empires before the Muslim expansion, both of these empires were fatally wounded by the Muslim expansions. The population and nobility could not count on anyone helping them out - the Crusades are still at least 300 years away. Meanwhile, if the Arabs won at Tours, they'd still have the Germans, Lombards, Goths and what have you to content with. All of these were mostly Christian by this point and would be horrified by a heathen army marauding through Christian lands (or at least, it'd make for a fine casus belli)
@@freddovich7925 I don't know. Considering how rapidly the Arabs conquered Iberia and Sicily, I see no reason why they'd find other places hard. After all, centuries later, the cavalry of Duke William would prove to be superior to any infantry in Europe. The Arabs mastered the use of cavalry centuries earlier. The mountain lands like Switzerland and elsewhere will remain in Christian hands because they can just build castles and stock up food to live forever. But the rest of Europe was indeed easy picking.
@@DieNibelungenliad true enough, but you've got to consider things like the different climate, more hostile population (generally, the more foreign = more hostile), the autonomy of all the little European kingdoms and the already overstretched giganticness of the Caliphate. They couldn't at the time spare the manpower
@@freddovich7925 I don't know about that. By the time the Umayyad caliph's vassal conquered much of Iberia, the ummayad caliph was losing land to the Abbas caliph
This was the European equivalent of Sun Tzu’s art of war. The only difference was that it was more practical and it was virtually updated by many Byzantines who wrote similar military manuals . One of them was written by one of the greatest Byzantine generals, Nikephoros Phokas.
@@baha3alshamari152 The Arabs and Turks could not take advantage of Byzantine if the Byzantines did not kill themselves with internals strife and traitors already. Most of the serious Byzantine defeats could be averted if they don't civil war the fuck out of each other all the time.
"If we find ourselves at war with a powerful people and one whose ways are strange to us, and the army, not knowing what to expect becomes nervous, then we must be very careful to avoid getting into an open battle with them right away." Romanos IV Diogenes at Manzikert: *LEEEROY JENKINS!!!*
"Not to mention, that it appears our scouting, against all our manuals advice, is horrible compared to that of our new steppe eastern enemy, cause we do not exactly know their position as we should, but they seem to be informed of ours. Plus, there they arrive in our camp offering some not so unreasonable terms to avoid fight, for now at least, while I have dispersed half my army away, yet I insist on rejecting the offered terms, opting instead for open battle, where although following manuals' traditions I do place my army in more than one main lines (could have opted for three) with provision for proper flank protection, I insist on playing the role of front soldier and lead the first central line, instead of waiting for later action as a general depending on battle developments utilizing the reserve (which I entrust to a, as it came to be, rebellious relative of the former imperial family and of my current empress wife and her son). Furthermore, I find it a good idea, as our army presses on to meet our mounted archer enemy and as they slowly retreat without engaging us yet only harassing us with arrows, to keep on going further ahead without any result outside than getting our troops tired, a point highlighted in our ancient manuals our steppe mounted enemies are well likely to remember to return with an offensive counter attack". (God RIP the soul of that good intending, successful previously general, who committed many mistakes on that very final campaign, but also very unlucky and horribly betrayed man Romanos IV Diogenis , that nasty fate brought to him the "gift" to wear the imperial purple the way and time he did).
The Byzantines had been at war with the turks for 30 years by the time of Manzikert. Romanos was a brilliant general, he was betrayed as a third of his army simply abandoned him thanks to the Doukids who wanted the throne for themselves. He was not stupid.
Great reference from Bulgaria. Through funny thing is they ended the first Bulgarian empire 1 time actually out smarting us in a narrow pass. Who wouldve thought?
@@ivokantarski6220 Yeah, throughout history Romans liked rushing through a narrow pass without scouting ahead, thinking abaut Bulgaria, but also Teutoburg and Lake Tresamine
Fucking civil wars unlimited of the romans. Then everyone discussing if Rome fell because of this enemy, because of this defeat, because of this x social reform or because of this technological improvement and efficiency in x army that Rome could not adapt to (which is a lie, Rome quickly took those things for itself, a example are the Contarii and Clibanarii). Rome fell because even in the worst moments and after the worst misfortunes in infrastructure, economy, morale and self-sustaining Roman power they always found the occasion for a classic civil war. The Romans were perfectly in charge of weakening themselves to blame any other enemy no matter how efficient it was. And I'm not saying that the empire was invincible or was never going to fall, but rather, that is a fanciful idea, but without a doubt it would have lasted longer if the Romans were not so fanatical about killing themselves, even emperors as capable as Aureliano who still He had a lot to give of himself for Rome.
The reign of Maurice is a textbook example of how to be successful militarily against external enemies and, however, crushed mercilessly by the enemy inside, with a resulting civil war... "Maurice campaigned extensively in the Balkans against the Avars - pushing them back across the Danube by 599. He also conducted campaigns across the Danube, the first Roman Emperor to do so in over two centuries. In the west, he established two large semi-autonomous provinces called exarchates, ruled by exarchs, or viceroys of the emperor. In Italy Maurice established the Exarchate of Italy in 584, the first real effort by the Empire to halt the advance of the Lombards. With the creation of the Exarchate of Africa in 590 he further solidified the power of Constantinople in the western Mediterranean. His reign was troubled by financial difficulties and almost constant warfare. In 602 a dissatisfied general named Phocas usurped the throne, having Maurice and his six sons executed. This event would prove a disaster for the Empire, sparking a twenty-six-year war with Sassanid Persia which would leave both empires devastated prior to the Muslim conquests. His reign is a relatively well documented era of late antiquity, in particular by the historian Theophylact Simocatta. The Strategikon, a manual of war which influenced European and Middle Eastern military traditions for well over a millennium, is traditionally attributed to Maurice." ( from Wikipedia)
As far as I can tell the emperor never campaigned in person in the Balkans - with the exception of an expedition towards the Long Walls outside Constantinople - or across the Danube. His generals, however, did campaign extensively and managed for a short while to secure the northern Danube frontier. At least until Phocas' revolt and mutiny and the subsequent overthrow and death of Maurice.
"It is ridiculous to try to gain a victory which is so costly and brings only empty glory." I wonder if Justinian's Gothic War and reconquest of Italy was the inspiration behind this quotation.
Not really. You see, the problem with the reconquest of Italy and the Gothic wars was not the reconquest so much as it was bad luck. Yes, as many say the wars drained the coffers of the Empire, yes it was a devastating war that would take years for the region to stabilize. But all of this would have been something that could be sustained and bring wealth and most importantly a flourishing populations and a thriving market to the empire...if the plague didn't happen. The Plague of Justinian as it is known ravaged the land and killed an estimated 1/5 of the total population of Constantinople and the Empire as a whole, the population of Constantinople at the time was about 600,000 to 800,000, personally I lean towards the latter estimate. So, that means that almost 160,000 people died to the capital alone. What do you think happened when 1/5 of the entire imperial population was suddenly killed? And the Goths weren't hit that badly so they had the numbers and vigour to attack again while the Empire was still reeling from the Plague. You can't judge a historical occurrence by seeing just one part of it alone. The plan was sound and it would have the desired result in the end. But you can't plan for a Plague.
Having lots of land to defend is bad but sometimes it's more convenient because u can rely on spare troops. Plus from time to time u could make profit. I got a question. Why didnt the Romans just build a freakish well defended city in north of peninsula and not bother much with the rest? Couldve meant their enemies will have to take it before going too south.
@@ivokantarski6220 Building a well defended city costs a lot, takes time, requires an active defense, and above all, large fortifications are not siege-proof and sometimes can even be bypassed. (Idk why they didn't do it. This is simply a guess of mine.)
@@salimbenchekroun7543 Your explenation seems legit to me. Also yeah they can be bypassed. Now it came on my mind that they didnt simply had a meaningful place to put it where there be lots of people. East Roman capital was between it's two parts and even as a geography it was very important location for naval or road trading. North of Rome it probadly wouldnt be enough important as trading and due to location trading routes from outside the peninsula cant be defended. Anyways
You do realize that Justinian never really quite trusted bellisarius?! He never quite gave him enough troops and funds to finish the job properly even though Bella Cyrus's wife was in thick with Justinian's wife? And in the end he relieved bellisarius and put narses in charge.and of course we had the plague and of course that made a manpower and a tax base that wasn't there so we could argue the point from this side or the other side either way the war was dragged out far too long and if the plague wouldn't have happened, they might have reconstituted the Western empire?! If you think that's far out look at Hannibal, the Carthage elders never did quite trust Hannibal and never gave him the funds in the troops and Etc to finish the job with Rome and we all know what happened in the end theyre not around to speak about it Carthage was obliterated! Pennywise pound foolish?!
"We will ride hard and hit their center once we have diverted their auxiliaries" "Strategos, the 101 maxims do not support this action" "Leandros, just try to keep up"
@Chris Tsitlides we have requirements btw. I. You must have visited atleast once the former territory of the eastern roman empire/byzantine empire. II. You must be a descendant of your ancestor. III. That's pretty much it. IV. Also you must not laugh when someone says Biggus Dickus. Because Womans should be disciplined. V. You also should be a Woman or have a Woman ancestor. IV. These are the requirements.
@@ΘΕΟΦΑΝΩΚΟΜΝΗΝΟΣ NO. It was Romans using their own traditional way of taking things and inventions based on the needs of the time. The Romans always did that from their very beginning. They used Greek traditions, nomadic traditions and many more. Then they used them in order to run their empire.
@@legioromanaxvii7644 Yeah... It wasen't like that. Leaving besides wheter they considered themeselves Romans or Greeks or maybe both. Their entire civilization, culture, religión (in the rituals) ect whas Hellenistic-Greek this pretty much applies for the military too. Byzantine themeselves would make use of Hellenistic equipment, art, and warfare rather than Roman ones. Belisarius wanted to be look as a second Pyrrhus according to Procopius, and therfore he used a muscular armor of the same colours and decorations of Pyrrhus. He had studied Xenophons military tactics and far more Greek manuals of war rather than the Roman ones (Vegetius). And before leaving Constantinople with his army to Italy he was given the title "Strategos Autokrator" a title used by the Hellenistic army's of old normally given to leaders of expeditions like Belisarius. He fougth in the phalanx formations of these Greek-Hellenistic authors and he even used a sarissa style formation against an Italian local army resisting to the *Greeks*.
@@ΘΕΟΦΑΝΩΚΟΜΝΗΝΟΣ Seriously are you kidding? Literally their whole government, their military, their economic system, many of their customs, their industry and architectural motifs were Roman. And they were proud of their Roman heritage and past. Their official languages were both Roman: Latin and Greek. Your dismissal of their Roman identity is hilarious, frankly. Something like their identity cannot nor should be readily dismissed, and their identity was absolutely Roman to the utmost. It is ironic that you bring up Belisarius, the guy whose sole mission under his Roman Imperial Majesty Justinian, was to bring Rome and Italy back into the Roman Empire. Belisarius, the Roman magister militum speaking both Latin and Greek, who upon entering Latin-speaking North Africa, proclaimed that the Latinized Roman Berbers should not be harmed by the Roman troops under his command, because they were "Romans" just like him and his men. The Romans from a very early age studied many of the Greek classics and appreciated Greek culture. That does not mean that they were not Romans. Open up some history books, and READ them. You are hopelessly lost on this subject and it shows.
Eastern Roman/Byzantine history is a subject often neglected. Lately I'm seeing a resurgence and consumption of such knowledge. A history not well known by the average person. Thanks for covering this Kings and Generals 👍🏼
Ever since the Crisis of the 3rd Century a critical problem for the roman army was the manpower shortage. They couldn't afford to lose their field army - it couldn't be replaced. The Byzantines understood this which explains their caution. Too bad the Byz commander at Yarmouk didn't remember this point...
It's a shame ! I'm French not Greek but I'm fascinated by the Byzantine Empire, one of the only (maybe the only one) real civilized western state during the early Medieval Age.
Maurice: I have completed complex treaties of war. I hope with these guidelines for future emperors, the Empire will last for eternity! What many future emperors actually do: 1. Join the army 2. Get pissed off by Emperor 3. Civil war time! 4. Oh Fuck, the Sassanid/Arab/Turks/nomads/Crusaders are coming, what should I do? 5.??? 6. Profit
I would argue that "On Skirmishing" was even more important to more of Byzantine history as they didn't have the resources to fight field battles like those described here, for much of the "Arab rush" and the "siege of Anatolia" periods; Where they easily should have gone the way of most broken civilizations. But, as you said, they adapt. They thing that made them so enduring in a part of the world which saw eternal turnover in culture and rule.
Well they fought land battles and this is happened to the reconstruction of the army after the Arab invasion to the famous theme system Futhermore the had create a professional standard army known as Tagmata
On Skirmishing was far less useful once that specific situation subsided. While this book continued to be useful well after the end of the arab raids. On Skirmishing was basically the most important by a long shot during the raiding/invading but after it was over it wasn't very useful.
@@bart_ender6116 it's a real ebb and flow, depending on their situation. The seljuks and further Rum to Ottoman sultanates would return the balance back to defensive mindsets and guerilla tactics once more, after Phokas to Basil had returned to more offensive deployments. I guess On Skirmishing was during a very dark and pretty hopeless period to read about. And the adaptation to the situation seemed so profound, to me, when I was learning all this history.
@@patrickleonard4187 I think it was brilliant. Those tactics are why they survived but later centuries when they were on the defensive the situation was very different with the Turkish people's moving in to stay vs constant raiding.
I did my Master's on this text, my thesis "Byzantine Military Strategy as Observed in the Strategikon of Marice, circa 575 -610 AD" Peter Woodrow. I bought a beautiful Gold coin of Maurice as a reward for fininishing my Masters.
New Rome: We should scout the area, scout the enemy army, discover their size, their deployment, their supplies, their weapons and we should use certain tactics and strategies for this particular situation... Old Rome at Cannae: We have the favor of Jupiter and 80.000 soldiers.We dont need any strategy...
@@tornado4708 Go wait in breadlines. Give your gold and money to Tayipp. You beg Qatar and Putin. Since 1821 you lost most of your empire , ex-Greek, ex-Armenian , ex-Kurd ....''turk'' :)
I have two questions here with me today: 1 What will happened if Emperor Maurice didn't start the Balkan campaigns but decided to call for a peace treaty with them instead? Will this prevent Phocas from deposing him and limit the Caliphate to just the Arabian peninsula? 2 Why all European monarchs, ranging from Spanish Kings to the Ottoman Sultans, always obsessed with acquiring the title of Caesar? After all, there are other titles that symbolized world domination like the Negus of Ethiopia, the Mansa of Mali and the Huangdi of China. I know that for most Europeans, acquiring these titles are basically and completely impossible. But to the Ottoman Sultans, I wonder what do they think of these titles, especially the last one because according to the Chinese tradition, it is stated that all lands in the world belonged to the Huangdi.
Maurice as any other Emperor in 6th century did actually tried to prevent wars as much as possible and was interrested in peace on Balkan which he actively sought to made by peace treaties.
Maurice did make treaties with other states such as the Persian Empire. It should be noted however that the Balkans at the time were a ... mess to put it politely with warbands of Slavs and Avar chieftains wandering around and no state to represent them. Yes the Avars had a Khan but he was unwilling to exercise much control over his people. So any treaty on the Balkan side would be more to the tune of "Yes mighty Horselord, the Empire will pay you handsomely to take your 400 riders and 600 foot and GTFO!"
The Ceaser held much respect for the roman people in Asia miner which dominated by the Ottomans, so this title some kind of legitimacy in the eyes of Ottoman sultans. In the euphemism of Islamic geography Anatolia was called ARDU-RUM which meant the land of the roman people and the sultan was called King of Roman people so the ceaser title which used by East Roman emperors in Istanbul was some kind of contuniwity from Ceaser the General. As far I know the title ceaser was used only by FATIH Mohamed the conqueror of Istanbul.
@Char Aznable _Rhōs_ - *Ῥῶς* (basically “Rus” ) was the Greek term , although I'm not sure how much Slavic they had been when the Byzantines first interacted with them
The slavs lived down to Pelopones. The crisis of the 7th century led to complete collapse of the inner administrative structure of the Balkan peninsula. Entire cities were abandoned. Serdika (Sofia) was abandoned, Philippopolis (Plovdiv) for the first time in its history lost its status as an administrative centre. Only the coastal cities survived the invasion.
Would love to see a similar video on the De Re Militari, the treatise which formed an important part of Western military studies and strategy well into the age of gunpowder.
Thats probly the smartest anti-spy messure Ive ever heard. Hopefully every soldier knows that their tent is the 3rd one from the wall facing north with the opening to the east.
No, Sun Tzu is more generic and easy to read, for example he mention to not let your enemy undestend your position, Number and location but never tell you how to do it. When strategos is a 12 book manual, pretty like a modern manual of war.
i'm writing a novel set in the ERE in the year 1081 and leading up to the end of the first crusade, and I recently bought this book. I'm so hyped to read it!!!
Oh so it starts at the battle of Dyrrhacium? That time is fascinating to me because of how, after the battle, the empire is attacked on all sides it seems and somehow they keep losing battles and somehow they keep raising more men and even raiding church treasures and selling off crown jewels to pay the armies, until they finally win
@@freddovich7925 Ok so, some spoilers, but they happen in the first few chapters (however i am not spoiling the big reveals that happens towards the end of the book). The prelude starts a cpl of months earlier with Alexios uprising taking Constantinople and Nikephoros abdicating, with Boril and Germanos first advocating for taking the Varangian Guard and face Alexios while his army was looting the city, and then mocking the emperor when he takes the Patriarch advise and abdicates. The prologue then jumps a month later to the Ambassador of Robert the Fox returning to Apulia to inform him of the new emperor only to find the imposter that Robert used as casus beli to start the war. The ambasador openly declares him a fraud in front of the whole court as well. (This happened for real and i wil use it to set up a vast conspiracy). The first chapter is then view from the main character, a young boy who lives in the church that is eventually burned down in the battle of Dyrrhacium. His mother died there while the church is burned by the Normans. Now this part is fake. While the main's character mother did die in the year 1981 in real life, she was in a different monastery. The main character also was never in that church nor is he captured by the normans. In reality he dies in battle in 1092. This series will consist of two parts. Initially this project was inspired by video games like Crusader Kings III and Attila: Total War. The first part, will be historically accurate depending on sources available to me that depicts the events that happened. In the case where conflicting sources occur, I will go with the one whose events best accommodate to the story i'm telling. When events differ from what really happened, a foot note will be made to explain the different events from actual history. The second part of the history will be completely an alternative history. Since this project was inspired by video games that are designed for you to tell your own world history; once the second part of the series begins I will no longer offer footnotes for events that are or aren’t historically accurate. Assume everything is my imagination or derived from events that happened in my campaign on those games. The events covered from the first part will be the first Norman invasion of the Balkans. The Peacheng and Cumman wars with the Eastern Roman Empire. The First Crusade. The Crusade of 1101. And the second Norman - Byzantine wars. I will also cover some special events like the speech from Pope Urban II, that initiates the crusade. While the speech was never actually recorded, there are some fragments of it written by ppl who witnessed it. Unfortunately they wrote them from memory years later, which means that they aren't the best source. I will attempt to re-write it using their words and mine. (ambitious I know, but its a project im having a lot of fun with) After that, events will follow my CK3 campaign, while the battles will be reproduced from my battles in Total War.
Little mention of the arabs, this is what happens When you leave one topic while preparing for an exam and a question comes in the exam exactly from that topic
When this was written, the Arabs were Christian, and extremely loyal to the Romans, and fought for them. There was no Islam, or Caliphate, or united Arab threat yet.
Previous episode: ua-cam.com/video/hFVpbJhawqk/v-deo.html
@@pipebomber04 the next episode is probably about the theme system
Big question : What do you think of Dovahatty's Unbiased History of Rome series?
@@SilenTHerO78614 Haven't watched it
@@KingsandGenerals please do one on ancient world jurisprudence
Will you guys be going over the ottoman expedition to the Aceh sultanate?
I am the translator of the Chinese edition of Strategikon. I feel glad that KG got an entire video about Strategikon. Although this book gave me much pains, I still hold the Chinese edition of Strategikon is the most well-done of all my works. I personally add forewords, introductions and notes that contain as much words can equal to half length of Maurice's own words. The book haven't sell well for the lack of interests for ancient warfare in my country, but the work is widely recognized as a well-done translation. Hope things could be changed in the future.
Any link. I'm bilingual
@@VicmundLim I dont think the chinese edition has been release oversea
@@mikawathorongil7127 what about the English one, I couldn't find any in my area
@@VicmundLim I think amazon has them. George T. Dennis' translation is very well done and help me a lot. just search ‘Strategikon’ in amazon and you can find it.
@@mikawathorongil7127 AHH thanks
That idea to flush out spies by having all soldiers go their tents is pretty damn smart, would not have thought of that.
Indeed! It's interesting how the best ideas are also very often very simple.
unless the spy is bribed from your own soldiers
@@kapoioskanenas2337 Then the spy needs the gold to bribe an entire tent of 20 or so men. Where is he going to hide that money?
@@kapoioskanenas2337 As was pointed out, Roman/Byzantine Tent Communities were pretty large. A contubernum was 8 people in one tent/tent community.
And you would have to hope none of the contubernums nearby ratted you out - you had teh ultimative nosy neighbours
You would need to be able to bribe all of them - wich would require a lot of gold - if they were even all bribeable.
In most of the time, sleeping on guard duty actually carried the death penalty. For full roman citizens and with no appeal. Not reporting someone that had slept on guard duty was propably a serious crime as well.
I would asume there are similar punishments for failing the rolecall or hiding someone that does not belong to your group.
@@christopherg2347 I didnt commend cause there are infinite solutions to bypass this problem.
Spy: "What's the plan?"
Army: "You are to be captured, the enemy General will tell you his plan and show you around his camp, you will then escape when he leaves you to be killed in an elaborate manner by an incompetent lackey, you will also shag his daughter... that's an important part, you will also destroy their base, we will then swoop in and claim victory."
Spy: "What do I get in return?"
Army: "The Generals daughter, until the next film."
is this a reference to something?
@@ilmibnsina2285 James Bond
That is the most important part. 😁😁
Bruh
Sounds like Uhtred and Alfred tslking
I think its honestly one of the most impressive things the Byzantines ever did in admitting that the unstoppable legions were a thing of the past. So many civilizations have gone on to fall because they couldn't accept the world had moved on and they needed to adapt. Byzantium recognized they didn't have the manpower, wealth or resources of the Caesars and so couldn't copy the legions without that. So they changed to focus more on cleverness and warfare management. It's incredible to think how many great empires could have survived if they had had the same mentality of adaptation.
Yes that's why they were one of the advanced empires in the medieval world
They were not Byzantines. They were Romans.
At the time of the Strategikon, the old Legions were still there(some of them dating back to the late Republic), and the old field armies were still in existence. Despite manpower shortages in the late 6th century, the army was still quite massive, much larger than during the era of Julius Caesar, and relative to the provinces it held, much larger than the army under Augustus or Trajan.
The Strategikon builds on centuries of experience from now lost(and some surviving) Roman & Greek military treatises, and the centuries of experience of the army.
Rome was always willing to adapt and that is why they lasted so long and became so powerful. P.S. That was not the only reason
@@KRYPTIA-mp4ol The definition of what it meant to be Roman changed over thousands of years, and those who are clueless about Roman history keep making the mistake in assuming that to be Roman one had to speak Latin. The Roman ethnicity progressed and went from being an ethnicity based on speaking Latin, then to Greek and Latin, and then finally Greek. They insisted on calling themselves Romans, they had preserved Roman culture and they were living in what to them was the eternal, ecumenical Roman nation. I will honor how they wanted to be seen, as ROMANS and not as Greeks. Thus I consider their ethnicity Roman, not Greek. They were Greek-speaking Romans and modern Greeks brainwashed by the Greek state will not tell the world how it should accept the Romans as being.
Lesson #1: Always, *always* , pay your troops
Lesson #2: Never trust the Praetorian Guard
Lesson #3: Survive
@@baha3alshamari152 Heh, better a quick death against a worthy foe than a life spent kneeling
@@Mrkabrat a worthy foe indeed, dying by the hands of an enemy is undesireable, but if fell by a worthy adversary, considered it as a good death
Lesson #4: Establish Fire Beacons.
@wassim games you dont even know the man, your overestimation is your downfall
@wassim games Isn't more corageous then to face a mighty foe in a duel even though you are scared? To press on even when fear makes your mouth run dry and your grip shaky?
Roman Empire: We go in, kill everything, let that be a lesson to they who survive.
Eastern Roman Empire: Okay, but do you scout?
@The Infidel Eastern Roman Empire: But do you scout ENOUGH?
Do u even scout bro?
They do scout - until forest start speaking in Germanic.
@Pantelis Tzimas Phillip II: Are you winning, son?
@@grlt23 bingo
New Rome: If we encounter a new people let's not engage head on.
Old Rome: *Raises 6 new armies in one war*
Also New Rome: Engages head on against the Arabs and loses half the empire
@@Dustz92 Old Rome: *Raises 6 MORE armies*
@@CMAzeriah Also Old Rome: Tell the opponent's ambassador to shove it and outlaw the word "peace" from being spoken.
@@velveteensallet949 Also New Rome: Lets let these blood thirsty fanatically religious killers into the wealthiest city and heart of what's left of our empire.
And yet old Rome always won.... It's really interesting how much pure will power counts. I mean still Cannae is the battle with the highest number of deaths in history. Yet Rome went "nope, let's keep on fighting"
What they didn't mention, is that the Strategikon also got a chapter about how to get a 25% discount on their spearmen, skirmishers and camels
aoe2?
and of course how to make cataphracts
Also a dedicated section to proper use of cheat codes
@@ntonisa6636 they say it wasn't England, but Northern Greece where the story of Robin Hood (Robenos Hodas) finds it roots
No eco bonus though :(
It’s often been said that the United States has perfect geography - weak neighbors to the north and south, fish to the east and west. We’re playing on easy mode.
The Byzantine Empire was the opposite. Enemies in literally all eight compass directions. Playing on god mode and they STILL managed to survive ten centuries.
Yeah and everyone wanted to conquer it's land. Because it was much advanced than rest of the world in every direction and much richer. For it was greatest statehood of mankind to survive so many disasters
@@davexorus9836 People might brush you off as being a fanboy but that was the truth. The lands of the Byzantine Empire were the most productive lands around, not because the soil was particularly fertile- in fact, Anatolia is quite hilly- but because of the organised farming, tax collection, superior technology, well-oiled bureaucracy, well-preserved and maintained Roman road network and centuries of preserved knowledge ensured they were almost exploited to the best of their capacity and yielded the maximum taxes without burdening the farmers so they had surplus wealth and could contribute to the state in other ways.
The more I read about the Byzantine Empire the more it feels like a modern, organised nation state stuck in the medieval period. They were just so advanced and ahead of their time. To find a fantasy equivalent the Byzantines feel like elves- strong, advanced remnants of a formerly great civilisation trying to hold out and preseve their civilisation. Being so much more advanced than everyone else givves them a unique advantage in wealth and military power but any losses are also incredibly costly and difficult to replace. They also keep shriking as time passes.
@@zippyparakeet1074 The rest of Europe suffered a decline in knowledge when the Western Roman empire fell. The Eastern Roman empire, by and large, preserved that knowledge and kept using it.
That being said, I've often wondered why the Byzantine Empire never really innovated and did much scientific research. The bump in science and knowledge really came from the Islamic nations translating ancient texts and funding state-run schools. While Byzantine infighting certainly did a lot of damage to the empire, I can't help but notice that they also just didn't keep up with innovations as much. Hence why crusaders could ultimately capture and sack Constantinople.
Perfect geography, no natural enemies since the Soviets.
YET the US fails. Corruption and greed is an ugly thing.
God mode means having the cheat code for “invulnerability” turned on. This was the opposite of the Eastern Roman Empire.
The part about not committing to heated battles with unknown enemies is hilarious once you realize just how many times they did that very same mistake, often with tragic consequences.
Romanos IV: Strategos, what did Emperor Maurice write about getting into heated battles again?
Strategos: The Strategikon says 'Absolutely do it', my lord. Wait, that's not right...
Romanos IV: Yay! (rides off to Manzikert)
Strategos: I'm sorry, my lord, my copy had a smudge. It actually says 'Absolutely do NOT do'... aaaaand he's gone.
Happend in Yarmouk, happend in Manzikert *facepalm*
@@johntitor1256 well to be fair Romanos was abandoned by the Doulkas in the battle of Mazinkert, cus they wanted to be emperors again
@@johntitor1256 Romanos was betrayed plus they already knew who the Turks were
@@johntitor1256 tbf, the Byzantines had been fighting the Turks already for 30 years by that point, so they can hardly be referred to as a "new" enemy.
"So You've Picked Hard Mode -A Guide" by Maurice and friends.
I actually have a translated copy of this. One of the manual had a single copy found in the Swedish Royal Archives. It probably came back with a ex-member of the Vangarian Guard.
i like the byzantines tactic of just settting stuff on fire with ancient napalm
The smell of victory!
Very effective against ships
@@Montechristoss Wish they made a huge siphon to use the Greek Fire on land.
@@ElBandito l think they use the Greek fire in land in a early form of grenades but l am not entirely sure
@@ElBandito I think they did. Emperor Nikephoros Phokas recommended using liquid fire against enemies of equal strength to your own troops to tip the scales in the Praecepta Militaria.
Maurice was a boss. Very under-rated emperor.
True he was a steady hand in commanding the empire .
Sure. A very capable emperor with many victories against Sassanids and Abars. Unfortunately his good work and legacy interrupted by usurper Phocas.
I do love this emperor, but too bad he did some mistakes.
As explained in another comment, he suceeded a popular but inefficient emperor, tiberios II, so people had a really bad opinion, comparing tiberios with maurikios.
Also, he didn't see or understand the fact that his army was exhausted. His soldiers refused a similar order 1 or 2 years before, but their general priscus had the courage to refuse the emperor's orders and thus, saving his life for a time.
Plus, he cut soldier's pay during the middle of persian war, it's almost a miracle they didn't kill or overthrown him at this time.
Still, great emperor, so many consequences with his death, Muslims world would be different if maurice hadn't been killed.
@@alex3987654 All the indirect pay cuts Maurice tried to impose (spending winter on enemy territory to ease logistical burden, being paid partly in kind rather than in cash etc), the soldiers were forced to accept anyway under Phocas and Herakleios, except this time all frontiers hard crumbled and the Empire was facing an existential struggle. It's hard to pinpoint what exactly he could have done differently, sort of disbanding half the field armies and leaving the Balkans at the mercy of the Avars and the Slavs.
@@sakdavid Don't mistaken, I really like this Emperor, was really efficient, against Persians and Avars and Tiberios II, emperor before him wasted the treasure, so I understand Maurice's position was difficult. I think he decided a far better strategy in the balkans against avars and slavs than justinian, justin ii or tiberios. Tiberios left a heavy minus to Maurice, thanks for the gift.
But I think he was too focused on the money, at a moment where situation were still fragile, Empire was recovering slowly from the war (and justinian's plague didn't help).
I think under Phokas and Herakleios, situation was so difficult for the empire, soldier couldn't act as they did with Maurice indeed.
I don't know what I would have done if I were maurice in 580 ^^ but his death has a so big impact on the world, that's what make his death so sad... As I comment on other video, imagine Mahomet's army against Maurice's Empire and Khosrau's II empire. Arabia would speak persian or greek today xd
Maurice is criminally underappreciated in history
I don’t understand how a person can put out this much good content this often. The way u describe the battles man ... sheesh. Mans be spittin. The battles play out in a movie in mind as you’re describing. History is immersive. Kings and generals all day.
It's not made alone
It's made with a team
Great observation
But clearly I was talking about the commentary. I only hear one voice ... idk bout u tho clearly u hearing a team of voices
@@steyn1775 might wanna get that looked at bud
💯💯💯
Maurice was one of the best emperors too bad he was killed by Phocas
Maurice was a good emperor but far from perfect,people tend to everidealize him while they in turn overdemonized Phacas not realizing how much was his image corrupted by Heraclian propaganda.
@@paprskomet Phocas tortures and killed Maurice’s family before he killed Maurice so no he deserves to be demonized
Not all Emperors were perfect
Basil 2 is my favorite
@@paprskomet I agree
I'm glad the Byzantines finally get some love and light shown on them. Love this series
Dear king and generals,
i would just like to say thank you. I have loved history for so long and you guys have made that possible.
You probably won't see this but thanks. I have watched you guys for mabey 3 years, That is almost as long as I have watched UA-cam many thanks.
From Finn .
I wonder what Sun Tzu would've said about the Strategikon. Would he have taken a few lessons from it. Or would he have added to it himself if he could. Makes me wonder a lot. My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.
I really wonder too
@@GanjaMasterBlaster---Thanks for replying.
@@brokenbridge6316 you're welcome
Also how are you?
As a Chinese who read the strategikon. I think sun Tzu will be interested in the logistics and barbarian part
@@GanjaMasterBlaster bio
Hidden rule of the Strategikon: If you are a very talented general, consider becoming rebellious.
Stilicho and Aetius: We don't do that here
Unless the Emperor is named Basil. That won't end well.
Phokas wasn't talented though. He was utterly incompetent which was what allowed the Persians to invade and for the Heraclians to finally revolt.
Some variation of Chinese model of two of "left and right hand" Generals seemed like it would have appropriate here.
@Anthony Ngu There was a Domestikos of the East and Domestikos of the West at some point (also a Megas Domestikos later on), which were kind of similar. The position of Domestikos of the East had been used by particularly ambitious generals to rebel several times.
Good to see some love for Leo VI's Taktika. Not many people know that his teenaged daughter also wrote a book about how to be pointlessly irritating in 15-60 seconds, called TikToka.
You bastard. *Thumbs up*
The Eastern Romans, who repulsed the full might of the Caliphate twice, guarded the eastern approaches to Europe for centuries, yet are largely ignored in the West, which constantly refers to the Battle of Tours, a food-fight in comparison. Thanks for giving them their due.
Ridiculous.
The battle at Tours was also important. Without it, much of Western Europe would be conquered regardless of how long the Emperor of Constantinople held back his enemies in the East.
You do not need to put down one heroic action to raise another. All heroes are to be praised by all.
@@DieNibelungenliad Yeah Tours was important, but let's not forget that it took the Romans centuries to subdue their parts of Europe. The idea that all of western Europe would roll over and die just because the Franks lost at Tours is ridiculous. Yes, the Arabs managed to conquor the Middle East, but by comparison, the Middle East was actually far more easy to control. It was governed by just 2 other empires before the Muslim expansion, both of these empires were fatally wounded by the Muslim expansions. The population and nobility could not count on anyone helping them out - the Crusades are still at least 300 years away. Meanwhile, if the Arabs won at Tours, they'd still have the Germans, Lombards, Goths and what have you to content with. All of these were mostly Christian by this point and would be horrified by a heathen army marauding through Christian lands (or at least, it'd make for a fine casus belli)
@@freddovich7925 I don't know. Considering how rapidly the Arabs conquered Iberia and Sicily, I see no reason why they'd find other places hard. After all, centuries later, the cavalry of Duke William would prove to be superior to any infantry in Europe. The Arabs mastered the use of cavalry centuries earlier. The mountain lands like Switzerland and elsewhere will remain in Christian hands because they can just build castles and stock up food to live forever. But the rest of Europe was indeed easy picking.
@@DieNibelungenliad true enough, but you've got to consider things like the different climate, more hostile population (generally, the more foreign = more hostile), the autonomy of all the little European kingdoms and the already overstretched giganticness of the Caliphate. They couldn't at the time spare the manpower
@@freddovich7925 I don't know about that. By the time the Umayyad caliph's vassal conquered much of Iberia, the ummayad caliph was losing land to the Abbas caliph
BTW, Maurice is Mavrikios in Greek.
This was the European equivalent of Sun Tzu’s art of war. The only difference was that it was more practical and it was virtually updated by many Byzantines who wrote similar military manuals . One of them was written by one of the greatest Byzantine generals, Nikephoros Phokas.
@@baha3alshamari152 The Arabs and Turks could not take advantage of Byzantine if the Byzantines did not kill themselves with internals strife and traitors already. Most of the serious Byzantine defeats could be averted if they don't civil war the fuck out of each other all the time.
Nikephoros phokas aka pale death of Saracens
Khalid just tore the book to pieces with Byzantine armies with it lol
@@baha3alshamari152 and then came John tzimiskes another great general your point ??
Not Byzantines
We referred to ourselves as Romans
Balanced. As all things should be.
👌
As all things need to be........
It's an honor to see you here sire
One of my favorites!
give it to Spiffing Brit...he will exploit the balance
"If we find ourselves at war with a powerful people and one whose ways are strange to us, and the army, not knowing what to expect becomes nervous, then we must be very careful to avoid getting into an open battle with them right away."
Romanos IV Diogenes at Manzikert: *LEEEROY JENKINS!!!*
"Not to mention, that it appears our scouting, against all our manuals advice, is horrible compared to that of our new steppe eastern enemy, cause we do not exactly know their position as we should, but they seem to be informed of ours. Plus, there they arrive in our camp offering some not so unreasonable terms to avoid fight, for now at least, while I have dispersed half my army away, yet I insist on rejecting the offered terms, opting instead for open battle, where although following manuals' traditions I do place my army in more than one main lines (could have opted for three) with provision for proper flank protection, I insist on playing the role of front soldier and lead the first central line, instead of waiting for later action as a general depending on battle developments utilizing the reserve (which I entrust to a, as it came to be, rebellious relative of the former imperial family and of my current empress wife and her son). Furthermore, I find it a good idea, as our army presses on to meet our mounted archer enemy and as they slowly retreat without engaging us yet only harassing us with arrows, to keep on going further ahead without any result outside than getting our troops tired, a point highlighted in our ancient manuals our steppe mounted enemies are well likely to remember to return with an offensive counter attack". (God RIP the soul of that good intending, successful previously general, who committed many mistakes on that very final campaign, but also very unlucky and horribly betrayed man Romanos IV Diogenis , that nasty fate brought to him the "gift" to wear the imperial purple the way and time he did).
The Byzantines had been at war with the turks for 30 years by the time of Manzikert. Romanos was a brilliant general, he was betrayed as a third of his army simply abandoned him thanks to the Doukids who wanted the throne for themselves. He was not stupid.
The Ck2 byzantine empire music in the background brings good memories.
Lesson 1: don't rush your army in a narrow pass without scouting ahead
Lesson 2: don't have a civil war
Great reference from Bulgaria. Through funny thing is they ended the first Bulgarian empire 1 time actually out smarting us in a narrow pass. Who wouldve thought?
@@ivokantarski6220 Yeah, throughout history Romans liked rushing through a narrow pass without scouting ahead, thinking abaut Bulgaria, but also Teutoburg and Lake Tresamine
@@radu2964 Myriokephalon as well
Fucking civil wars unlimited of the romans. Then everyone discussing if Rome fell because of this enemy, because of this defeat, because of this x social reform or because of this technological improvement and efficiency in x army that Rome could not adapt to (which is a lie, Rome quickly took those things for itself, a example are the Contarii and Clibanarii). Rome fell because even in the worst moments and after the worst misfortunes in infrastructure, economy, morale and self-sustaining Roman power they always found the occasion for a classic civil war. The Romans were perfectly in charge of weakening themselves to blame any other enemy no matter how efficient it was. And I'm not saying that the empire was invincible or was never going to fall, but rather, that is a fanciful idea, but without a doubt it would have lasted longer if the Romans were not so fanatical about killing themselves, even emperors as capable as Aureliano who still He had a lot to give of himself for Rome.
@@radu2964 Caudine Forks is another big one that's often left out
'Grass grows, birds fly, sun shines, and brother, I hurt people. BOINK!'
- early draft of the Strategikon
I'm a force of nature
Well you know, the byzantines a lot of emphasis on *SCOUTING*
The reign of Maurice is a textbook example of how to be successful militarily against external enemies and, however, crushed mercilessly by the enemy inside, with a resulting civil war...
"Maurice campaigned extensively in the Balkans against the Avars - pushing them back across the Danube by 599. He also conducted campaigns across the Danube, the first Roman Emperor to do so in over two centuries. In the west, he established two large semi-autonomous provinces called exarchates, ruled by exarchs, or viceroys of the emperor. In Italy Maurice established the Exarchate of Italy in 584, the first real effort by the Empire to halt the advance of the Lombards. With the creation of the Exarchate of Africa in 590 he further solidified the power of Constantinople in the western Mediterranean.
His reign was troubled by financial difficulties and almost constant warfare. In 602 a dissatisfied general named Phocas usurped the throne, having Maurice and his six sons executed. This event would prove a disaster for the Empire, sparking a twenty-six-year war with Sassanid Persia which would leave both empires devastated prior to the Muslim conquests. His reign is a relatively well documented era of late antiquity, in particular by the historian Theophylact Simocatta. The Strategikon, a manual of war which influenced European and Middle Eastern military traditions for well over a millennium, is traditionally attributed to Maurice." ( from Wikipedia)
As far as I can tell the emperor never campaigned in person in the Balkans - with the exception of an expedition towards the Long Walls outside Constantinople - or across the Danube. His generals, however, did campaign extensively and managed for a short while to secure the northern Danube frontier. At least until Phocas' revolt and mutiny and the subsequent overthrow and death of Maurice.
Man I was thinking of reading this book today and you made my day . You are fascinating and unpredictable . Thanks a lot.
"It is ridiculous to try to gain a victory which is so costly and brings only empty glory."
I wonder if Justinian's Gothic War and reconquest of Italy was the inspiration behind this quotation.
Not really. You see, the problem with the reconquest of Italy and the Gothic wars was not the reconquest so much as it was bad luck.
Yes, as many say the wars drained the coffers of the Empire, yes it was a devastating war that would take years for the region to stabilize. But all of this would have been something that could be sustained and bring wealth and most importantly a flourishing populations and a thriving market to the empire...if the plague didn't happen.
The Plague of Justinian as it is known ravaged the land and killed an estimated 1/5 of the total population of Constantinople and the Empire as a whole, the population of Constantinople at the time was about 600,000 to 800,000, personally I lean towards the latter estimate. So, that means that almost 160,000 people died to the capital alone. What do you think happened when 1/5 of the entire imperial population was suddenly killed? And the Goths weren't hit that badly so they had the numbers and vigour to attack again while the Empire was still reeling from the Plague.
You can't judge a historical occurrence by seeing just one part of it alone. The plan was sound and it would have the desired result in the end. But you can't plan for a Plague.
Having lots of land to defend is bad but sometimes it's more convenient because u can rely on spare troops. Plus from time to time u could make profit. I got a question. Why didnt the Romans just build a freakish well defended city in north of peninsula and not bother much with the rest? Couldve meant their enemies will have to take it before going too south.
@@ivokantarski6220 Building a well defended city costs a lot, takes time, requires an active defense, and above all, large fortifications are not siege-proof and sometimes can even be bypassed. (Idk why they didn't do it. This is simply a guess of mine.)
@@salimbenchekroun7543 Your explenation seems legit to me. Also yeah they can be bypassed. Now it came on my mind that they didnt simply had a meaningful place to put it where there be lots of people. East Roman capital was between it's two parts and even as a geography it was very important location for naval or road trading. North of Rome it probadly wouldnt be enough important as trading and due to location trading routes from outside the peninsula cant be defended. Anyways
You do realize that Justinian never really quite trusted bellisarius?! He never quite gave him enough troops and funds to finish the job properly even though Bella Cyrus's wife was in thick with Justinian's wife? And in the end he relieved bellisarius and put narses in charge.and of course we had the plague and of course that made a manpower and a tax base that wasn't there so we could argue the point from this side or the other side either way the war was dragged out far too long and if the plague wouldn't have happened, they might have reconstituted the Western empire?! If you think that's far out look at Hannibal, the Carthage elders never did quite trust Hannibal and never gave him the funds in the troops and Etc to finish the job with Rome and we all know what happened in the end theyre not around to speak about it Carthage was obliterated! Pennywise pound foolish?!
"We will ride hard and hit their center once we have diverted their auxiliaries"
"Strategos, the 101 maxims do not support this action"
"Leandros, just try to keep up"
it should have been ''stratege''and ''Leandre'', in greek the nouns are inclined😊
@@dimk735 *_NEEEEEEEERD!!!_*
Have a like for that reference~
The Strategikon names this manoeuvre Steel Rain.
The Emperor protects
Loving this series! "Byzantium" doesn't get enough attention. I'm learning so much!
Im still waiting for a Netflix show or movie covering just about ANYTHING from the Byzantine period.
Thank you for this one, I will now start to create my army.
Hail *Caesar*
@Chris Tsitlides we have requirements btw.
I. You must have visited atleast once the former territory of the eastern roman empire/byzantine empire.
II. You must be a descendant of your ancestor.
III. That's pretty much it.
IV. Also you must not laugh when someone says Biggus Dickus. Because Womans should be disciplined.
V. You also should be a Woman or have a Woman ancestor.
IV. These are the requirements.
Always spring for that Logistica bonus. It's expensive, I know, but it's worth it.
@@animeyahallo3887 Yeah i fit
Maurice is my favorite Roman Emperor
"Byzantine warfare continued a tradition of Greek-Hellenistic type of warfare" Now this is so much better.
They did, but the Romans always did continue Greek traditions from their very beginning.
@@legioromanaxvii7644 yeah but this were Greeks using their own traditions and inventions.
@@ΘΕΟΦΑΝΩΚΟΜΝΗΝΟΣ NO. It was Romans using their own traditional way of taking things and inventions based on the needs of the time. The Romans always did that from their very beginning. They used Greek traditions, nomadic traditions and many more. Then they used them in order to run their empire.
@@legioromanaxvii7644 Yeah... It wasen't like that. Leaving besides wheter they considered themeselves Romans or Greeks or maybe both. Their entire civilization, culture, religión (in the rituals) ect whas Hellenistic-Greek this pretty much applies for the military too. Byzantine themeselves would make use of Hellenistic equipment, art, and warfare rather than Roman ones. Belisarius wanted to be look as a second Pyrrhus according to Procopius, and therfore he used a muscular armor of the same colours and decorations of Pyrrhus. He had studied Xenophons military tactics and far more Greek manuals of war rather than the Roman ones (Vegetius). And before leaving Constantinople with his army to Italy he was given the title "Strategos Autokrator" a title used by the Hellenistic army's of old normally given to leaders of expeditions like Belisarius. He fougth in the phalanx formations of these Greek-Hellenistic authors and he even used a sarissa style formation against an Italian local army resisting to the *Greeks*.
@@ΘΕΟΦΑΝΩΚΟΜΝΗΝΟΣ Seriously are you kidding? Literally their whole government, their military, their economic system, many of their customs, their industry and architectural motifs were Roman. And they were proud of their Roman heritage and past. Their official languages were both Roman: Latin and Greek. Your dismissal of their Roman identity is hilarious, frankly. Something like their identity cannot nor should be readily dismissed, and their identity was absolutely Roman to the utmost. It is ironic that you bring up Belisarius, the guy whose sole mission under his Roman Imperial Majesty Justinian, was to bring Rome and Italy back into the Roman Empire. Belisarius, the Roman magister militum speaking both Latin and Greek, who upon entering Latin-speaking North Africa, proclaimed that the Latinized Roman Berbers should not be harmed by the Roman troops under his command, because they were "Romans" just like him and his men. The Romans from a very early age studied many of the Greek classics and appreciated Greek culture. That does not mean that they were not Romans. Open up some history books, and READ them. You are hopelessly lost on this subject and it shows.
Oh boy what a treat to wake up to
Quick someone write a story of a Greek James Bond.
You should read "τον καιρό του Βουλγαροκτόνου" (at the years of the Bulgar-slayer) by Penelope Delta.
@@ioannisbougios1451 τι μαλακάς 🤣
@@crazycocainemercenary7498 Γιατί μαλάκας;; Μυθιστόρημα για κατασκοπεία στο Βυζάντιο είναι. Εκτός απ' αυτό εγώ δεν έβρισα κανέναν.
Iakovos Desmos.
@@ioannisbougios1451 δεν το είπα για κακό φίλε μου σχήμα λόγου για πλάκα σόρι άμα σε πηραξε
Love me some Eastern Rome!
Byzantine series of K&G are soo briefly and informative! Hope we see a lot more of those videos!
Eastern Roman/Byzantine history is a subject often neglected. Lately I'm seeing a resurgence and consumption of such knowledge. A history not well known by the average person. Thanks for covering this Kings and Generals 👍🏼
Ever since the Crisis of the 3rd Century a critical problem for the roman army was the manpower shortage. They couldn't afford to lose their field army - it couldn't be replaced. The Byzantines understood this which explains their caution. Too bad the Byz commander at Yarmouk didn't remember this point...
Thankyou guys this is amazing info, I never thought a UA-cam channel to make better documentaries than the ones on tv
What a well done video, beautifully drawn!
KINDS AND GENERALS!! THE BEST HISTORY CHANNEL EVER MADE!!!
Arabs: (reading the part about avoiding direct battles) How is it on duels?
Even in 1000 years there will still be new content about Rome 👍
As a Greek I'd like to thank Kings and Generals for covering our history, schools here don't teach you this stuff
It's a shame ! I'm French not Greek but I'm fascinated by the Byzantine Empire, one of the only (maybe the only one) real civilized western state during the early Medieval Age.
@KING of #SHORT Yep Just doing that to be clearer for people, some of them forget this
Fascinating subject. I had no idea that the Byzantine Empire produced such works. Well done, as always!
A well paid, well fed man can endure anything.
Lol maybe back then. Most boys today dont meet the cut.
@El Dimos Karam the history of armies proves your statement incorrect.
"soldiers march on their bellies" - Napoleon (at least i think he said that)
These Byzantine videos are great, such a fascinating empire and I want more.
These Roman videos.
I’m actually reading the Strategikon right now. It’s definitely a slow one but I can see some of it being applicable in a modern business setting.
Indeed, in some businesses, it's given the same clout as "Art of War". Especially the focused chapters on infiltration and spying.
Is there a English translation for it?
I read this manual and use it when dealing with my Supervisor and Department Head....
It works
“The insignificant and peripheral Arabs meanwhile, were barley worth a mention”
The Biggest mistake in the Journal.
They were unknown. The manual states to regard an unknown enemy with great caution.
They were unknown. The manual states to regard an unknown enemy with great caution.
@@angrymonkeynoises maybe because they lost 70% of there lands to them
@@salahddinebensebane8429 it was written before the Arab invasions
@@βασιλεύς-ζ4λ l know l am just responding to his stupid question
Iv been waiting on this all week. Godamn I love history
Maurice: I have completed complex treaties of war. I hope with these guidelines for future emperors, the Empire will last for eternity!
What many future emperors actually do:
1. Join the army
2. Get pissed off by Emperor
3. Civil war time!
4. Oh Fuck, the Sassanid/Arab/Turks/nomads/Crusaders are coming, what should I do?
5.???
6. Profit
Loving these episodes about the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Empire!
I would argue that "On Skirmishing" was even more important to more of Byzantine history as they didn't have the resources to fight field battles like those described here, for much of the "Arab rush" and the "siege of Anatolia" periods; Where they easily should have gone the way of most broken civilizations. But, as you said, they adapt. They thing that made them so enduring in a part of the world which saw eternal turnover in culture and rule.
Well they fought land battles and this is happened to the reconstruction of the army after the Arab invasion to the famous theme system Futhermore the had create a professional standard army known as Tagmata
On Skirmishing was far less useful once that specific situation subsided. While this book continued to be useful well after the end of the arab raids. On Skirmishing was basically the most important by a long shot during the raiding/invading but after it was over it wasn't very useful.
@@bart_ender6116 it's a real ebb and flow, depending on their situation. The seljuks and further Rum to Ottoman sultanates would return the balance back to defensive mindsets and guerilla tactics once more, after Phokas to Basil had returned to more offensive deployments. I guess On Skirmishing was during a very dark and pretty hopeless period to read about. And the adaptation to the situation seemed so profound, to me, when I was learning all this history.
@@patrickleonard4187 I think it was brilliant. Those tactics are why they survived but later centuries when they were on the defensive the situation was very different with the Turkish people's moving in to stay vs constant raiding.
I did my Master's on this text, my thesis "Byzantine Military Strategy as Observed in the Strategikon of Marice, circa 575 -610 AD" Peter Woodrow. I bought a beautiful Gold coin of Maurice as a reward for fininishing my Masters.
New Rome: We should scout the area, scout the enemy army, discover their size, their deployment, their supplies, their weapons and we should use certain tactics and strategies for this particular situation...
Old Rome at Cannae: We have the favor of Jupiter and 80.000 soldiers.We dont need any strategy...
Proud for our Greeks forefathers of our Greek-Christian Orthodox Empire. Eastern Roman Empire.
“Meet the Romans”
Now I have Meet the Spartans memories.
*prancing off in pairs*
I remember that film when i was little
I still love it and i will defend it with my life
OH NO NOT I, I WILL SURVIVE!
This is the best episode so far!!! Thanks!
It was the Avars and the Arabs that led the Byzantines to write these military manuals and hence adopt to this new type of warfare.
The earliest Strategikon was written describing the Sassanids, it predates the Arabs.
Thank you very much for creating educational videos for free 🙏
Στρατηγικόν
@@tornado4708 1 Dollar=8,32 Lira
@@tornado4708
Go wait in breadlines.
Give your gold and money to Tayipp.
You beg Qatar and Putin.
Since 1821 you lost most of your empire , ex-Greek, ex-Armenian , ex-Kurd ....''turk''
:)
@Dani Al Which dream world do you live in?Even in a video that has nothing to do with Turks, targeting the Turks shows your suffering.
@Dani Al Ηurt ? I didn't invite any ''turk'' with my comment you came over :)
@@tornado4708 hey troll l see you !!! That's why you came to this video go ahead spit your toxicity
Instantly ordering Strategikon online , thank you for another brilant video .
East Romans: Spy, be smart, scout
West romans: So anyway, I started blasting
West Roman: we got a huge empire our of that 😜😜😜
I've been waiting for this for ages. Good work fellas.
I have two questions here with me today:
1 What will happened if Emperor Maurice didn't start the Balkan campaigns but decided to call for a peace treaty with them instead? Will this prevent Phocas from deposing him and limit the Caliphate to just the Arabian peninsula?
2 Why all European monarchs, ranging from Spanish Kings to the Ottoman Sultans, always obsessed with acquiring the title of Caesar? After all, there are other titles that symbolized world domination like the Negus of Ethiopia, the Mansa of Mali and the Huangdi of China. I know that for most Europeans, acquiring these titles are basically and completely impossible. But to the Ottoman Sultans, I wonder what do they think of these titles, especially the last one because according to the Chinese tradition, it is stated that all lands in the world belonged to the Huangdi.
Maurice as any other Emperor in 6th century did actually tried to prevent wars as much as possible and was interrested in peace on Balkan which he actively sought to made by peace treaties.
Maurice did make treaties with other states such as the Persian Empire. It should be noted however that the Balkans at the time were a ... mess to put it politely with warbands of Slavs and Avar chieftains wandering around and no state to represent them. Yes the Avars had a Khan but he was unwilling to exercise much control over his people. So any treaty on the Balkan side would be more to the tune of "Yes mighty Horselord, the Empire will pay you handsomely to take your 400 riders and 600 foot and GTFO!"
@@konst80hum Correct.
he will do his best ,but the caliphate was ready and destroyed many armies even being outnumbered ,So no maurice can't do anything
The Ceaser held much respect for the roman people in Asia miner which dominated by the Ottomans, so this title some kind of legitimacy in the eyes of Ottoman sultans.
In the euphemism of Islamic geography Anatolia was called ARDU-RUM which meant the land of the roman people and the sultan was called King of Roman people so the ceaser title which used by East Roman emperors in Istanbul was some kind of contuniwity from Ceaser the General.
As far I know the title ceaser was used only by FATIH Mohamed the conqueror of Istanbul.
Must add these to the list. You guys are awesome in your work. Teach on
Can you cover the army Manuel of the Egyptian Mamelukes ie the “furusiyya”?
The unwavering will to triumph against all odds and the ability to adapt with changing times are marks of a true Roman.
Thank you for covering the Strategikon!
Excellent job 👍👌👍
Great video!!!
I'd love to learn all about the Slavic - Byzantine interactions.
@Char Aznable _Rhōs_ - *Ῥῶς* (basically “Rus” ) was the Greek term , although I'm not sure how much Slavic they had been when the Byzantines first interacted with them
The slavs lived down to Pelopones. The crisis of the 7th century led to complete collapse of the inner administrative structure of the Balkan peninsula. Entire cities were abandoned. Serdika (Sofia) was abandoned, Philippopolis (Plovdiv) for the first time in its history lost its status as an administrative centre. Only the coastal cities survived the invasion.
Would love to see a similar video on the De Re Militari, the treatise which formed an important part of Western military studies and strategy well into the age of gunpowder.
hellenic-greek heritage
This has been fantastic; excellent video on this very interesting ancient literature!
Thats probly the smartest anti-spy messure Ive ever heard.
Hopefully every soldier knows that their tent is the 3rd one from the wall facing north with the opening to the east.
That was awosome !!!! Very very good sir!!! Thank you so much !!!
Imperial Rome: This is a Heroic Victory worthy of Roman Arms.
Byzantine Rome: A Shamefur Dispray!
Say that to Basil II
You are so Thorough in your Research. Keep it Up 👍🏼
Eastern Roman Empire!the correct title thanks Kings and Generals
The beauty is in the details
Some people call him the space cowboy. Some call him the gangster of love.
Some people call him Maurice, cause he speaks of the properties of war
Man, this guy really has thought of everything.
This is very much like Sun Tzu's 'Art of War'
No, Sun Tzu is more generic and easy to read, for example he mention to not let your enemy undestend your position, Number and location but never tell you how to do it. When strategos is a 12 book manual, pretty like a modern manual of war.
Long awaited video!! Thank you!!
The Byzantine period is so much more interesting than the hegemonic early empire/late republic period.
It is always a booster to see you guys upload
Will you make a video about Strategikon of Kekaumenos ?
Ψαγμένο !!!
Πολύ ωραία ιδέα φίλε μου
Το έχεις διαβάσει; Δεν αναφέρεται σε τίποτε νέο. Είναι απλά μία απομίμηση της Καινής Διαθήκης.
Loved this! I'd love to see more coverage of ancient and influential books and manuals
The name "Strategikon" is Greek, are the treatises which are included therein of Greek origin as well?
Yes, it's written in a practical and uncomplicated style.
great subject! amazing work as always guys.
i'm writing a novel set in the ERE in the year 1081 and leading up to the end of the first crusade, and I recently bought this book. I'm so hyped to read it!!!
Oh so it starts at the battle of Dyrrhacium? That time is fascinating to me because of how, after the battle, the empire is attacked on all sides it seems and somehow they keep losing battles and somehow they keep raising more men and even raiding church treasures and selling off crown jewels to pay the armies, until they finally win
@@freddovich7925 Ok so, some spoilers, but they happen in the first few chapters (however i am not spoiling the big reveals that happens towards the end of the book).
The prelude starts a cpl of months earlier with Alexios uprising taking Constantinople and Nikephoros abdicating, with Boril and Germanos first advocating for taking the Varangian Guard and face Alexios while his army was looting the city, and then mocking the emperor when he takes the Patriarch advise and abdicates.
The prologue then jumps a month later to the Ambassador of Robert the Fox returning to Apulia to inform him of the new emperor only to find the imposter that Robert used as casus beli to start the war. The ambasador openly declares him a fraud in front of the whole court as well. (This happened for real and i wil use it to set up a vast conspiracy).
The first chapter is then view from the main character, a young boy who lives in the church that is eventually burned down in the battle of Dyrrhacium. His mother died there while the church is burned by the Normans.
Now this part is fake. While the main's character mother did die in the year 1981 in real life, she was in a different monastery. The main character also was never in that church nor is he captured by the normans. In reality he dies in battle in 1092.
This series will consist of two parts. Initially this project was inspired by video games like Crusader Kings III and Attila: Total War.
The first part, will be historically accurate depending on sources available to me that depicts the events that happened. In the case where conflicting sources occur, I will go with the one whose events best accommodate to the story i'm telling.
When events differ from what really happened, a foot note will be made to explain the different events from actual history.
The second part of the history will be completely an alternative history. Since this project was inspired by video games that are designed for you to tell your own world history; once the second part of the series begins I will no longer offer footnotes for events that are or aren’t historically accurate. Assume everything is my imagination or derived from events that happened in my campaign on those games.
The events covered from the first part will be the first Norman invasion of the Balkans. The Peacheng and Cumman wars with the Eastern Roman Empire. The First Crusade. The Crusade of 1101. And the second Norman - Byzantine wars. I will also cover some special events like the speech from Pope Urban II, that initiates the crusade. While the speech was never actually recorded, there are some fragments of it written by ppl who witnessed it. Unfortunately they wrote them from memory years later, which means that they aren't the best source. I will attempt to re-write it using their words and mine. (ambitious I know, but its a project im having a lot of fun with)
After that, events will follow my CK3 campaign, while the battles will be reproduced from my battles in Total War.
@@dennismarquez7354 that actually sounds really nice, good luck with it!
Little mention of the arabs, this is what happens When you leave one topic while preparing for an exam and a question comes in the exam exactly from that topic
When this was written, the Arabs were Christian, and extremely loyal to the Romans, and fought for them.
There was no Islam, or Caliphate, or united Arab threat yet.