Note: Although it's completed there still should have been other stuff I could've added or fixed, such as a few errors I've noticed even though its alternate history. Even with the modern borders being used by the end I haven't thought much of it if they would gain more land northern or if Byzantium would last in modern times, but if I ever wanted to change that then I'll have to go through the pain of exporting it again (so this is the best I could do). So far this could be one of the best projects I've ever made (but not perfect).
Also if I ever do another "alternative timeline", I might either do Classical Iran from 1st to 9th centuries or the "Holy German Empire" that was shown here. I might do a regular alternate history for the 2nd option though cuz I don't want it to last too long and take too much time editing.
I love this unique alternative timeline and with an interesting twist to how the "Roman Empire" ends. The only complain I have is that they would never change their term to "Byzantine" which was given by some historians in the XVI century to separate them from Early Rome.
Still there identity DIDN'T die out the slavs and Greeks were in Turkish subjugation from 1516's yet when everyone got their independence it was 1858's and that's the same thing@@pakistanimapperr
@@pakistanimapperr maybe in bigger cities only like Belgrade Sofia and Plovdiv. But not the countryside. And remember until those countries independence there werent that big cities!
Why the hell would greece become a thing in this timeline? This is possibly the most unreasonable event lmao. It became a thing in ours because the restoration of Rhomania as the greek people wanted wouldnt be something allowed by the world order at the time.
Roman was more of a national imperial identity, the people in Greece hold on to there Hellenic cultural identity so when the Roman Empire no longer the power it was and starts to collapse for sure a Greek revival movement would happen and even in this timeline a Hellenic renaissance would still happen leaning for the people to reclaim there ancestral heritage. Now in Anatolia the more diverse Greek ethnic groups like Cappadocian and Pontic Greeks and the rest of the Asian minor population would maybe still retain there Roman nationality since they wouldn’t see themselves more of a Greek but a Roman. So I can still see Anatolia remaining Roman they wouldn’t overthrow there emperor
@@KingBobChad the thing is.. they didn't call themselfs that..they called themselfs Romans they indetified as Romans originally they were the Eastern Roman Empire..the term Byzantine Empire came from the western Empires of the time because they didn't want to accept them as the real New Rome and continuetion of the old Roman empire in general..because at that point everyone was trying to claim that they were the new rome and they was going against them for this reason and for being Orthodoxs..so thats why they called them Byzantium and Byzantine empire..but Byzantines always called themselfs Romans even the Greeks in the region they never said "well am greek you know" they said "am Roman" they identified as Eastern Roman Empire from start till the end.. its just that epithete stuck more..
1:24:37 Albania wouldn't pop up because Greece wouldn't encircle these Ottoman territories. Serbian and Bulgarian gains would most likely be more limited as well
Would Albania or an Albanian identity and nation-state exist in a Byzantine timeline though? At least as we know it today? Because the north part, as well as the Albanian-majority region of Kosovo were once Serbian lands, while the southern part was Northern Epirus, part of Greco-Roman/Hellenic culture and history.
It's good, but Greek identity would NEVER be revived in this world, I guarantee. There is no reason for it. The only reason Greek identity was revived so much in our world was because the great powers did not want a powerful state to replace the Ottomans, since in the 1800s when Roman identity died, a Roman state would want control of Constantinople and Anatolia. Also, this world's Byzantium would be extremely wealthy, powerful, and rich, unlike the Ottomans. The Ottomans suppressed innovation often, but the Romans were oftentimes the centers of innovation and far ahead of others technologically. The name "Byzantium" would also never be used. It's like calling Mexico Tenochtitlia. Roman identity didn't die until the 1800s and would never die or be replaced with Greek or Byzantine in this world. Edit: Why did the Byzantines not side with the Entente in this world? I figure that Russia would be their #1 ally forever, and I doubt the Bulgarians would ever forgive the Byzantines considering the things done to them. Basically, I think there is no incentive to join the war in the first place, and even if they did, they would ally the Russians and attempt to make gains in the Balkans.
@@James-cq2bj In our world, Hellenistic ideals (Greece aka Hellas in Greek) were revived because the Greek people wanted to establish a new common revolutionary identity against the Ottomans. Basically, "Greeks" only returned because of Ottomans. It would have definitely been called something like the Roman Republic in this world. Without Rome’s existence, Roman identity survived 400 years, so with it existing the whole time, and the pride of the Romans, it definitely would have stayed, also considering there was nobody to revolt against.
@@switzerland5777 I mostly agree with you, however, "Greek" was a term used by the west to refer to the Eastern Romans/Byzantines all throughout the Middle Ages. It wasn't an invention of the 19th century. Western fascination with Hellenistic Greece long preceded any Greek attempts at independence and was influenced by the Renaissance and Enlightenment. My line of thinking is that the country would settle with the name "Romania" after the Middle Ages, but in the 18th century onwards there would be certain philosophers and writers who would be idealizing the country's pre-Roman past. I could see a national/liberal movement popping up associating "Romanness" with tyrannical, backwards, autocratic government, and advocating the country change its name to Hellas, with traditionalists and Orthodox Christians opposing this.
@@stevej71393 it’s possible but I doubt it. no other country with a long history like Rome has changed their name in a similar way. For example, china retained the name Zhonguo even though it had only been monarchist for thousands of years, and even though Classical Chinese things are still romanticized in the east. Also, the west saying something is not Eastern Europe saying something. Germany is Deutschland. India is Bharat. Etc.
Honestly, if the eastern roman empire would done better after the fourth crussade and survived, it would have taken a very similar route to that of the ottomans, maybe even going as far as retaking territories like egypt, tunisia and even some southern italian states. Much like the ottomans, byzantium would have slowly declined due to the discovery of Americas and the improvement of sailing, making western european geography way better than the city of constantinople, specially once the brits start conquering much of India and the silk road gets dominated by them btw, i like that in the end republican byzantium is actually an state that recognizes itself as greek and not a weird kind of roman republic
Byzantines probably didnt even have a chance to secure Anatolia after 4th crusade, no way they would have any sort of ambition to take Syria, Egypt and the rest of North Africa. At this point in time, the Romans cared more about maintaining their power and not getting destroyed by neighbor then to fulfill some sort of Roman empire larp like its an EU4 game or something. If they somehow survived the 4th crusade at most they would be a regional power in the area
@@ninjacat8659 the empire wasn't immediately dead as soon as the 4th crusade happened, Nicea was still able to defend itself from the turks and defeated the bulgars latins and their rival states. The thing is that the emperors that followed after were terrible and there was also a civil war literally at the worst time possible I maybe exagerated a bit with the reconquering egypt and north Africa part but it's too hard to imagine the history of the middle east without the ottomans and reminder that they also began as a very tiny state that eventually ate out all of their fellow post-ilkhanate neighbours
@@hnfjdshkfjhdsjkgbfoujgipfd891 I mean, the Ottomans were turks, they had very good fighting abilities and prowess literally everywhere. Its not unreasonable to say the Byzantines could be able to recreate that, its just very unlikely and if were going as realistic as possible, even if the 4th crusade hadn't happened, at most they would stop at Syria and probably get pushed right back into anatolia I mean, sure, but the Byzantines are almost always fighting themselves. Thats kind of the main problem. it was the reason why Manzikert happened, why the Sack of Constantinople happened, and why the final nail in the coffin, the Civil war of 1341-1347, but at that time, even attempting to expand out of Anatolia isn't even a question for them, and fighting a hostile Serbia, Bulgaria and the hordes of Turkish Beyliks isn't a very favorable battle for them. And its not as if the Timurids magically go away. The Ottomans got pretty lucky to have survived the Timurids, I doubt the Byzantines would last long if they were invaded or had antagonized them, especially since the Byzantine's core at that time would have been in Anatolia, not mainland europe
No because the Turks who conquered had barely civilization before. So they would've been more successful. Same with the fall of Rome and Germanics owning the area for only a short while, whereas if West Rome was alive then they'd be a LOT more successful.
dude..Romans wasn't Ottomans..they were different..different philosophy you have to understand that they were Romans.. and what was the Romans best skill ??? to adapt no matter the situation to adapt and and try to do it better than everyone and also being Diplomatic... you thing that they wouln't start collonizing like the rest of the europeans of course they would... and of course they would have an unstopable Navy too.. Byzantium managed to be the strongest naval power at some point it wouln't be anything new to them..dont put them in the same category as Ottomans they wouln't do the same shit like them..different empire different pholophy they wasn't like the Ottoman sultans that were getting dumber and dumber by the age and the only thing they cared about was their harems lol..
Cool vid, a few things I disagree with though: • With a surviving Eastern Rome, it’s debatable whether the Russian Empire as we know it would still form. It mainly existed in our timeline to try to fill the void left by the fall of the Romans to the Ottomans. Yes, there’d still be some sort of “Russian state,” but I’d doubt it’d be exactly the same as IRL. • The Empire would never change its name. Even if the outside world began referring to them as “Byzantium,” they themselves would likely always call their country “Basileia Rhomaion,” Empire/Kingdom of the Romans, until the monarchy was deposed. And even then, they’d likely still call themselves Romans no matter the form of government. • After conquering Egypt in the 1630’s, Rome would likely expand across North Africa. They’d likely also take advantage of the early fall of the HRE in this timeline by re-subjugating Italy - particularly the city of Rome, their former nucleus. Especially after being gifted Sicily and Naples by Spain. Basically, after conquering Egypt and the early fall of the HRE, the Eastern Romans would pull a Justinian 2.0 if they could. • While I do agree that the Enlightenment and Napoleonic Wars would likely stir up Republican sentiments in the Empire, it wouldn’t become “Greece.” The new nation would be referred to by the outside world as the “Byzantine Republic,” and the “2nd Roman Republic” by the locals.
Looking back from the project I made months earlier, I realized those mistakes even though it's "alternative". Many people didn't like the empire being renamed "Byzantium" by the 16th century and I understood it now, since it was mainly used after its fall to the Ottomans. Other errors I shouldn't have added was the Crimean war which shouldn't have happened in the first place. But what was more complicated to me was the first world war, either the Eastern Romans could've joined the Central Powers, the Entente, or stayed neutral. IMO the ending I chose wasn't good at all and many people had agreed, just I wasn't too sure Greek identity would be noticed in this timeline but stood with it anyways. Rhomania would've been the chosen name for the republic instead but there was already a Romania in this timeline, unless I decided to change it to like "Dacia" or something.
Me aimlessly clicking on the video: harmless alt-history Me after watching the video: I wish Eastern Rome never fell 😭 I’m invested in video map history, and this is something else
A few thoughts: -with a strong Byzantine Empire, Russia as we know it would not exist. Russian/Muscovite politics and culture were strongly shaped by the fall of Constantinople. The Crimean War certainly would not happen because the cause of the war would not take place. -I find it unlikely that Byzantium would conquer the Balkans and Hungary in the same manner as the Ottomans. There would simply be no rationale to do so. The dismemberment of Hungary was due to a combination of factors that would not be easily replicated in this scenario. Mediterranean expansion seems much more likely. -Byzantium conquering the Mamluks just like the Ottomans did, and then holding it for several hundred years is overly optimistic. The Arabs would have tolerated Christian rule much less than Muslim Turks, and the Coptic Christians would not have been very friendly either due to longstanding differences with the church in Constantinople. -Byzantine survival would have a huge impact on western European culture as interest in classical Greek and Roman culture and history expanded in the Enlightenment. Similarly, the lack of "The Terrible Turk" would have a huge political and cultural impact as well. -Byzantium would most likely take the name of Romania. Real life Romania would take a different name, perhaps settling with Wallachia or Vlachia. Also, "Byzantium/Byzantine" is an anachronism that would never have been used historically.
I like that even in this timeline the last emperor of the Eastern Roman empire shares names with the first. And the founder of this new roman republic also bears the name Constantine.
I mean.... nothing happened to change the world drastically. The crusades still happened, leading to the teutonic order still conquering the baltics and becoming prussia and nothing else I think would have changed the timeline.
I like how you made the Romans lose wars and territory here and there makes it more realistic, it makes the Roman’s struggles to remain on a map really interesting.
Интересное видео. Но 1:21:14 меня смутил: крымская война не началась бы из-за оскорбления христианских святынь, так как византия была бы православной страной, это раз. Даже если бы и началась, совершенно не ясно, га чей бы стороне она выступила: значит, английские, французские и сардинские эскадры не проникли бы через Босфор в Черное море.
The vid is a bit too slow. It was too slow even when I increased the speed to 2x. Romania would most likely not exist because the official name of the Roman Empire was Romania. This was also the name the Greek insurgents used in XIX century. I guess South Italy, Crimea and the coast up to Danube Delta could still be the part of the Empire till the end because of strong Greek ethnic presence.
Doubtful, due to their long standing cultural resistance, while trying to preserve their identity. (One thing that did annoy me in the video is why does Albania take North Epirus if it is Guaranteed to be 100% Hellenic in this Timeline?)
I kinda doubt that the Romanian principalities and the concept of Romania as a whole would exist in this timeline seeing how the eastern romans still exist technically. Not sure though
Мне кажется, что хорошим альтернативным сюжетом стала бы буржуазная революция в Византии, подобная Французской революции и произошедшая под её влиянием. Появление греческого национализма сбросило бы римские регалии, как отсталые и архаичные, страна стала бы называться Греческой Империей. Также интересно было, если бы Наполеон покорил Византию и разрушил там старые институты, как это было в Священной Римской Империи, и создал вместо старой Восточной Римской Византии Цисбалканскую, Балкано-Анатолийскую или Греческую республику. Любопытно то, что Византия в вашем сценарии во многом повторяет судьбу Османской Империи. Географическое положение очень влияет на историю государства и по сути судьба Османской Империи - это естественный и логичный путь Византии, если бы не упадок после IV крестового похода. Османы заняли пустующее место и их сердцем стала зона проливов.
Was good until the first World War. I disagree with the notion that everything has to go to the liberal democratic direction. Especially if something like Byzantium survives for so long. It takes 1 uprising of the "wrong side" in America or Britain and liberalism is finished. Alt-history rarely depicts this and instead they keep lots of stuff similar. Still, good work.
@9:44 Please explain why Kavadh II gave all those territories back? That was just insane! Nothing short of a collapse would make them give up all those conquered lands just like that.
WW1 borders way too similar to OTL, especially with both Austria (why is austria so large) and Germany (doubt they would form like that anyways, prussia only happened because the ERE fell) also romania existing is odd, wouldn't they be called something like Dacia? I mean, the ERE called themselves Rhomania anyways. Also colonization would look wayyy different or wouldn't happen at all if the Romans still existed. WW1 would never happen, the closest would be a great war esqu scenario if European powers somehow still became ontop, also the Romans would never call themselves "Byzantines", let alone "Greece". Realistically, if they still existed they'd name themselves Romania or something similar to that. Also they wouldn't be as powerful as portrayed in the video. By a certain point you're kind of conflating the Byzantines and Ottomans together and forgetting they were both different states and entities. Its a pipe dream for them to ever reclaim Syria, let alone all of Egypt and then push up into Hungary and Romania. Also Safavids forming is interesting. Dont know much of Persian history but I doubt they would form at all. Anyways, other than, its still a really good video. I love seeing alternative history of different empires, especially the Byzantines. Its really nice to see how creative people can be, keep up the good work brother 💯💯
@@yazovgaming I mean, yeah, but the point of alt history is to be alternative history, it's not necessary supposed to be too realistic, because alot of things happen OTL that realistically should never have happened or had very small chances too Many of these videos are too afraid to try something different, they only feel comfortable changing the past but when it comes to the present they just fall back on what's already there instead of using theory imagination and creating an entirely new timeline that has some basis in reality
The Eastern Roman Empire wouldnt have lost so often later on, if they really survived untill the the 1700's with all their knowledge, they would have been THE worlds greatest superpower, they would have changed ww1 a lot, the ERE isnt the sick man of europe after all.
I mean, when the byzantines fell they were 1000-2000 (depending on how you count it) years old, i doubt age would play much of a significant factor in their survival
The only aspect that I can respect about the work (which is otherwise confusing, sterile on a figurative, imaginative and creative level on a historical level) that doesn't even arouse interest... I point out that the only positive point that you have made with this video is "the music" (although it is still a copy and paste). But the rest, and the fantasy of telling that story is pure contempt for history, by not including and despising the history of a country so important in the history of the world, such as the Spain of the “Austrias “hasburgs”and the (bourbons), from the Middle Ages, with the reconquest and the expulsion of the Muslims from the Iberian Peninsula, through the influence that the discovery of America had in Europe with the decisive influence, at a strategic and geopolitical level that it had on the entire continent and therefore, in all the nations of Europe, and above all it is unforgivable with how decisive and influential was the Emperor Charles I of Spain and (V) fifth of Germany, (Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire), which you do not name at any time... nor be not even the fantasy that Philip II, king of the Spanish Habsburgs and king of Spain, had been born… (It is contemptuous towards Spain and absurd to ignore it in the history you have made…)… and without naming and excluding the 30 years war between Catholicism and Protestantism and ignoring Spain in the corresponding part that it was and in the relationship with Austria and until the 18th century.
Российская империя ни коода бы не воевала с винзантией они были бы союзникам и в первой мировой византия бы выступила против австрии за контроль на балканах
I wonder if you can make an all months version of all roman-germanic wars like you did regarding roman-persian wars. That would be very beautiful to see
The flag looks here throughout their History rather disappointing… Romans had always a beautiful style… should have chosen the purple flag with the two headed eagle and the cross with the four B in the background…
Bro wouldnt the republic of greece at the end of the video still be roman as like they were byzantium or eastern rome but like, they just now call themselves greece? They would still be roman.
it's unlrealistic, plus their would still be Greeks living outside the borders in the balkans towards the end. This video is at the end the balkans borders look to similar to modern day
Its funny how the ending being similar to OTL doesn't make sense in the context of an otherwise great alt history. At the very least the Balkans, middle East, part of north Africa and central Europe (Germany and Hungry specifically) should be significantly altered.
Yeah, the entire reason Greece exists today as hellenic culture is because the byzantines fell and when Greece was trying to establish their independence they wanted to be seen as more western via adopting more Hellenic culture (anybody can correct me if im wrong) if the byzantines never fell there wouldn't be any need for that and they would just call themselves Romania or something similar to that, not Greece
You shouldnt have made byzantium to greece, remove the title of roman empire and made byzantium into WW1, there was no reason to make byzantium go to the central powers. Crimean war shouldnt exist in this timeline since Byzantium and Russia would have been allies. I just don't know why you did this, but great effort for making 1933 maps tho
That's what the byzantine empire should look like in the past. Erm but in early 1500s you forgot to make the byzantine grow bigger than the Ottoman empire. (not including crimea cuz it's the Russia empire's important ingredient, but including the southern remaining trunk part of the mamluk sultanate and the Atlantic ocean border of western Africa part from the mamluk sultanate.) erm and you kinda forgotten to add the Mongolian empire. And also Italy should be independent from the romans due to the western roman empire has collapsed. And in WW1 the byzantine empire should be on it's own side called "Byzantine Roman Powers (Gwaed* Pink)" and then in 1920 the byzantine empire would become a republic due to its slowly passing away from planet earth and in 1930 the byzantine republic now has disbanded and turned into Greece. And before the Pre Spanish civil war republic of Greece hand over Cyprus back to the UK and 50% of the East modern Turkey's land become independent simular to Serbia and called their country Turquia while Greece has still it's old ancient capital Constantinople and prepares to get ready for WW2 in support of the allies while the USSR is the red side on its own and once whole of South America joined as allies Turqua literally had a N__i bomb destroyed their buildings and became angry and became against from Germany and joined the allied powers with Greece. Italy's president got A____inated by the American spies and their new president to replace him decided to switch sides and change its flag back to the kingdom of Italy. Then N__i germany sent out F___ist Italy in the north and the Italian civil war began. Once the USSR and it's red army powers weakened Germany the Us & British empire allies annexed F__ist Italy and the kingdom of Italy (South Italy) reunited after the F__ist defeat. Then Kingdom of Italy and Turqua rescued Republic of Greece and reunited Kingdom of yugoslavia before the Soviets invade yugoslavia. And when all the nations captured Berlin Austria rebels N__i germany and joins the allies and N__i Germany falls and become defeated. The Soviets were literally retreated from upper Central Germany and the us allies enter and border Berlin with the Ussr army. The ussr will let Yugoslavia occupy the mouth of weimar Germany's Prussia land. And kaliningrad gets split by yugoslavia, Lithuania and USSR below Poland. And everyone lives happily ever after from WW2 Allied & USSR victory. The End.
Why is there not a single clash with the Habsburgs and Venice and an alliance with the Safavids in 1739? Byzantium had a very weak fleet, why did it include islands?! But the main question is why the eastern territories were not captured by the Mongols: Hulagu and Timur? Especially Timur, because for him the destruction of Byzantium and its population (yes, genocide) means gaining absolute authority in the Islamic world and restoring the Caliphate.
Note: Although it's completed there still should have been other stuff I could've added or fixed, such as a few errors I've noticed even though its alternate history. Even with the modern borders being used by the end I haven't thought much of it if they would gain more land northern or if Byzantium would last in modern times, but if I ever wanted to change that then I'll have to go through the pain of exporting it again (so this is the best I could do). So far this could be one of the best projects I've ever made (but not perfect).
Also if I ever do another "alternative timeline", I might either do Classical Iran from 1st to 9th centuries or the "Holy German Empire" that was shown here. I might do a regular alternate history for the 2nd option though cuz I don't want it to last too long and take too much time editing.
@@kamasick4632 Will you make an every month video next?
@@kamasick4632 nah the alternative byzantine empire looks great mate. You can literally keep that video. 👌🏻😊
I love this unique alternative timeline and with an interesting twist to how the "Roman Empire" ends. The only complain I have is that they would never change their term to "Byzantine" which was given by some historians in the XVI century to separate them from Early Rome.
The author of the video put it there for convenience
In an odd twist, a part of Rome returns back to a republic after 2000 years
Maybe not forever 😉
Til a new Caesar appears
shouldnt greece keep more of its balkan territories since theres probably a lot more greeks living there?
Wdym? Even under Basil the great Serbians and Bulgarians were the majority in these areas.
@@stephmod7434 yeah but wouldnt more greeks move in because they own the territories for centuries
Still there identity DIDN'T die out the slavs and Greeks were in Turkish subjugation from 1516's yet when everyone got their independence it was 1858's and that's the same thing@@pakistanimapperr
@@pakistanimapperrto explain it in simple terms the Greeks were under 800 years of Turkish subjugation yet there still is a Greek state
@@pakistanimapperr maybe in bigger cities only like Belgrade Sofia and Plovdiv. But not the countryside. And remember until those countries independence there werent that big cities!
Why the hell would greece become a thing in this timeline? This is possibly the most unreasonable event lmao. It became a thing in ours because the restoration of Rhomania as the greek people wanted wouldnt be something allowed by the world order at the time.
I find it more goofy that Russia is an enemy of Byzantium. If anything they'd be close allies
Roman was more of a national imperial identity, the people in Greece hold on to there Hellenic cultural identity so when the Roman Empire no longer the power it was and starts to collapse for sure a Greek revival movement would happen and even in this timeline a Hellenic renaissance would still happen leaning for the people to reclaim there ancestral heritage. Now in Anatolia the more diverse Greek ethnic groups like Cappadocian and Pontic Greeks and the rest of the Asian minor population would maybe still retain there Roman nationality since they wouldn’t see themselves more of a Greek but a Roman. So I can still see Anatolia remaining Roman they wouldn’t overthrow there emperor
Me casually enjoying the video:
Him: 'the name byzantine began to be officially used'
me: thats the part where you lose me
me reading this:
me:
you:
me again:
you:
"We've been calling ourselves Romans for centuries, but just for the sake of it, let's give our nation Constantinople's old name instead."
@@CadetGriffin ngl byzantines is a wasted name since the city of Byzantium had nothing to do with the Romans. Constantinian Empire would be better
@@KingBobChad the thing is.. they didn't call themselfs that..they called themselfs Romans they indetified as Romans originally they were the Eastern Roman Empire..the term Byzantine Empire came from the western Empires of the time because they didn't want to accept them as the real New Rome and continuetion of the old Roman empire in general..because at that point everyone was trying to claim that they were the new rome and they was going against them for this reason and for being Orthodoxs..so thats why they called them Byzantium and Byzantine empire..but Byzantines always called themselfs Romans even the Greeks in the region they never said "well am greek you know" they said "am Roman" they identified as Eastern Roman Empire from start till the end.. its just that epithete stuck more..
1:24:37 Albania wouldn't pop up because Greece wouldn't encircle these Ottoman territories. Serbian and Bulgarian gains would most likely be more limited as well
Would Albania or an Albanian identity and nation-state exist in a Byzantine timeline though? At least as we know it today? Because the north part, as well as the Albanian-majority region of Kosovo were once Serbian lands, while the southern part was Northern Epirus, part of Greco-Roman/Hellenic culture and history.
It's good, but Greek identity would NEVER be revived in this world, I guarantee. There is no reason for it. The only reason Greek identity was revived so much in our world was because the great powers did not want a powerful state to replace the Ottomans, since in the 1800s when Roman identity died, a Roman state would want control of Constantinople and Anatolia. Also, this world's Byzantium would be extremely wealthy, powerful, and rich, unlike the Ottomans. The Ottomans suppressed innovation often, but the Romans were oftentimes the centers of innovation and far ahead of others technologically. The name "Byzantium" would also never be used. It's like calling Mexico Tenochtitlia. Roman identity didn't die until the 1800s and would never die or be replaced with Greek or Byzantine in this world.
Edit: Why did the Byzantines not side with the Entente in this world? I figure that Russia would be their #1 ally forever, and I doubt the Bulgarians would ever forgive the Byzantines considering the things done to them. Basically, I think there is no incentive to join the war in the first place, and even if they did, they would ally the Russians and attempt to make gains in the Balkans.
That Rome to Greece is probably just a regionalization republicanism thing, like how Ottoman Empire transitioned to Türkiye.
@@James-cq2bj In our world, Hellenistic ideals (Greece aka Hellas in Greek) were revived because the Greek people wanted to establish a new common revolutionary identity against the Ottomans. Basically, "Greeks" only returned because of Ottomans. It would have definitely been called something like the Roman Republic in this world. Without Rome’s existence, Roman identity survived 400 years, so with it existing the whole time, and the pride of the Romans, it definitely would have stayed, also considering there was nobody to revolt against.
@@switzerland5777 I mostly agree with you, however, "Greek" was a term used by the west to refer to the Eastern Romans/Byzantines all throughout the Middle Ages. It wasn't an invention of the 19th century. Western fascination with Hellenistic Greece long preceded any Greek attempts at independence and was influenced by the Renaissance and Enlightenment. My line of thinking is that the country would settle with the name "Romania" after the Middle Ages, but in the 18th century onwards there would be certain philosophers and writers who would be idealizing the country's pre-Roman past. I could see a national/liberal movement popping up associating "Romanness" with tyrannical, backwards, autocratic government, and advocating the country change its name to Hellas, with traditionalists and Orthodox Christians opposing this.
@@stevej71393 it’s possible but I doubt it. no other country with a long history like Rome has changed their name in a similar way. For example, china retained the name Zhonguo even though it had only been monarchist for thousands of years, and even though Classical Chinese things are still romanticized in the east. Also, the west saying something is not Eastern Europe saying something. Germany is Deutschland. India is Bharat. Etc.
@@James-cq2bj Probably the case and Konstantinos is something like the Greek Ataturk.
Honestly, if the eastern roman empire would done better after the fourth crussade and survived, it would have taken a very similar route to that of the ottomans, maybe even going as far as retaking territories like egypt, tunisia and even some southern italian states.
Much like the ottomans, byzantium would have slowly declined due to the discovery of Americas and the improvement of sailing, making western european geography way better than the city of constantinople, specially once the brits start conquering much of India and the silk road gets dominated by them
btw, i like that in the end republican byzantium is actually an state that recognizes itself as greek and not a weird kind of roman republic
Byzantines probably didnt even have a chance to secure Anatolia after 4th crusade, no way they would have any sort of ambition to take Syria, Egypt and the rest of North Africa. At this point in time, the Romans cared more about maintaining their power and not getting destroyed by neighbor then to fulfill some sort of Roman empire larp like its an EU4 game or something. If they somehow survived the 4th crusade at most they would be a regional power in the area
@@ninjacat8659 the empire wasn't immediately dead as soon as the 4th crusade happened, Nicea was still able to defend itself from the turks and defeated the bulgars latins and their rival states.
The thing is that the emperors that followed after were terrible and there was also a civil war literally at the worst time possible
I maybe exagerated a bit with the reconquering egypt and north Africa part but it's too hard to imagine the history of the middle east without the ottomans and reminder that they also began as a very tiny state that eventually ate out all of their fellow post-ilkhanate neighbours
@@hnfjdshkfjhdsjkgbfoujgipfd891 I mean, the Ottomans were turks, they had very good fighting abilities and prowess literally everywhere. Its not unreasonable to say the Byzantines could be able to recreate that, its just very unlikely and if were going as realistic as possible, even if the 4th crusade hadn't happened, at most they would stop at Syria and probably get pushed right back into anatolia
I mean, sure, but the Byzantines are almost always fighting themselves. Thats kind of the main problem. it was the reason why Manzikert happened, why the Sack of Constantinople happened, and why the final nail in the coffin, the Civil war of 1341-1347, but at that time, even attempting to expand out of Anatolia isn't even a question for them, and fighting a hostile Serbia, Bulgaria and the hordes of Turkish Beyliks isn't a very favorable battle for them. And its not as if the Timurids magically go away. The Ottomans got pretty lucky to have survived the Timurids, I doubt the Byzantines would last long if they were invaded or had antagonized them, especially since the Byzantine's core at that time would have been in Anatolia, not mainland europe
No because the Turks who conquered had barely civilization before. So they would've been more successful. Same with the fall of Rome and Germanics owning the area for only a short while, whereas if West Rome was alive then they'd be a LOT more successful.
dude..Romans wasn't Ottomans..they were different..different philosophy you have to understand that they were Romans.. and what was the Romans best skill ??? to adapt no matter the situation to adapt and and try to do it better than everyone and also being Diplomatic... you thing that they wouln't start collonizing like the rest of the europeans of course they would... and of course they would have an unstopable Navy too.. Byzantium managed to be the strongest naval power at some point it wouln't be anything new to them..dont put them in the same category as Ottomans they wouln't do the same shit like them..different empire different pholophy they wasn't like the Ottoman sultans that were getting dumber and dumber by the age and the only thing they cared about was their harems lol..
I love this video! I was speeding it though.
Cool vid, a few things I disagree with though:
• With a surviving Eastern Rome, it’s debatable whether the Russian Empire as we know it would still form. It mainly existed in our timeline to try to fill the void left by the fall of the Romans to the Ottomans. Yes, there’d still be some sort of “Russian state,” but I’d doubt it’d be exactly the same as IRL.
• The Empire would never change its name. Even if the outside world began referring to them as “Byzantium,” they themselves would likely always call their country “Basileia Rhomaion,” Empire/Kingdom of the Romans, until the monarchy was deposed. And even then, they’d likely still call themselves Romans no matter the form of government.
• After conquering Egypt in the 1630’s, Rome would likely expand across North Africa. They’d likely also take advantage of the early fall of the HRE in this timeline by re-subjugating Italy - particularly the city of Rome, their former nucleus. Especially after being gifted Sicily and Naples by Spain. Basically, after conquering Egypt and the early fall of the HRE, the Eastern Romans would pull a Justinian 2.0 if they could.
• While I do agree that the Enlightenment and Napoleonic Wars would likely stir up Republican sentiments in the Empire, it wouldn’t become “Greece.” The new nation would be referred to by the outside world as the “Byzantine Republic,” and the “2nd Roman Republic” by the locals.
Looking back from the project I made months earlier, I realized those mistakes even though it's "alternative". Many people didn't like the empire being renamed "Byzantium" by the 16th century and I understood it now, since it was mainly used after its fall to the Ottomans.
Other errors I shouldn't have added was the Crimean war which shouldn't have happened in the first place. But what was more complicated to me was the first world war, either the Eastern Romans could've joined the Central Powers, the Entente, or stayed neutral. IMO the ending I chose wasn't good at all and many people had agreed, just I wasn't too sure Greek identity would be noticed in this timeline but stood with it anyways. Rhomania would've been the chosen name for the republic instead but there was already a Romania in this timeline, unless I decided to change it to like "Dacia" or something.
Me aimlessly clicking on the video: harmless alt-history
Me after watching the video: I wish Eastern Rome never fell 😭
I’m invested in video map history, and this is something else
I like how this video paid homage to the prophecy that Byzantium would begin and end with an Emperor Constantine
We love romans even in alternative scenarios thank you for your video
🇮🇷❤️🇬🇷🇮🇹
not bad! i hope you continue making alternative histories.
Awesome video!
Damn bro this is amazing
This is a masterpiece in Ancient/Roman Mapping videos genera ❤️
A few thoughts:
-with a strong Byzantine Empire, Russia as we know it would not exist. Russian/Muscovite politics and culture were strongly shaped by the fall of Constantinople. The Crimean War certainly would not happen because the cause of the war would not take place.
-I find it unlikely that Byzantium would conquer the Balkans and Hungary in the same manner as the Ottomans. There would simply be no rationale to do so. The dismemberment of Hungary was due to a combination of factors that would not be easily replicated in this scenario. Mediterranean expansion seems much more likely.
-Byzantium conquering the Mamluks just like the Ottomans did, and then holding it for several hundred years is overly optimistic. The Arabs would have tolerated Christian rule much less than Muslim Turks, and the Coptic Christians would not have been very friendly either due to longstanding differences with the church in Constantinople.
-Byzantine survival would have a huge impact on western European culture as interest in classical Greek and Roman culture and history expanded in the Enlightenment. Similarly, the lack of "The Terrible Turk" would have a huge political and cultural impact as well.
-Byzantium would most likely take the name of Romania. Real life Romania would take a different name, perhaps settling with Wallachia or Vlachia. Also, "Byzantium/Byzantine" is an anachronism that would never have been used historically.
I like that even in this timeline the last emperor of the Eastern Roman empire shares names with the first. And the founder of this new roman republic also bears the name Constantine.
The madman, he did it
Yuh that's one of the videos ever made
So many butterflies died in the making of this timeline for the napoleonic wars and WW1 to have occurred in the same way it did in OTL.
I mean.... nothing happened to change the world drastically. The crusades still happened, leading to the teutonic order still conquering the baltics and becoming prussia and nothing else I think would have changed the timeline.
I like how you made the Romans lose wars and territory here and there makes it more realistic, it makes the Roman’s struggles to remain on a map really interesting.
Awesome video
Интересное видео. Но 1:21:14 меня смутил: крымская война не началась бы из-за оскорбления христианских святынь, так как византия была бы православной страной, это раз. Даже если бы и началась, совершенно не ясно, га чей бы стороне она выступила: значит, английские, французские и сардинские эскадры не проникли бы через Босфор в Черное море.
Orthodox people will never start a religious conflict, right?
Right?
It was a wonderful introduction and clearly explaining...thanks for sharing
I really like. good job. the music is also good. Couldn't you create an alternative chronology of the Western Empire like this too?
Amazing.
The vid is a bit too slow. It was too slow even when I increased the speed to 2x. Romania would most likely not exist because the official name of the Roman Empire was Romania. This was also the name the Greek insurgents used in XIX century. I guess South Italy, Crimea and the coast up to Danube Delta could still be the part of the Empire till the end because of strong Greek ethnic presence.
So great man!
this is amazing. I love your mapping style
They were constantly bullied by nomadic invaders and still survived to 1933, impressive
Well done!
I honestly don't think Bulgarian culture would still exist. I feel that they would all be integrated as well as the Albanians and Macedonians.
Doubtful, due to their long standing cultural resistance, while trying to preserve their identity. (One thing that did annoy me in the video is why does Albania take North Epirus if it is Guaranteed to be 100% Hellenic in this Timeline?)
I kinda doubt that the Romanian principalities and the concept of Romania as a whole would exist in this timeline seeing how the eastern romans still exist technically. Not sure though
Мне кажется, что хорошим альтернативным сюжетом стала бы буржуазная революция в Византии, подобная Французской революции и произошедшая под её влиянием. Появление греческого национализма сбросило бы римские регалии, как отсталые и архаичные, страна стала бы называться Греческой Империей.
Также интересно было, если бы Наполеон покорил Византию и разрушил там старые институты, как это было в Священной Римской Империи, и создал вместо старой Восточной Римской Византии Цисбалканскую, Балкано-Анатолийскую или Греческую республику.
Любопытно то, что Византия в вашем сценарии во многом повторяет судьбу Османской Империи. Географическое положение очень влияет на историю государства и по сути судьба Османской Империи - это естественный и логичный путь Византии, если бы не упадок после IV крестового похода. Османы заняли пустующее место и их сердцем стала зона проливов.
I like the long 900 year pause on Roman-Persian wars aka the best historical rivalry of all time.
Was good until the first World War. I disagree with the notion that everything has to go to the liberal democratic direction. Especially if something like Byzantium survives for so long. It takes 1 uprising of the "wrong side" in America or Britain and liberalism is finished. Alt-history rarely depicts this and instead they keep lots of stuff similar. Still, good work.
Great video! Wow!
@9:44 Please explain why Kavadh II gave all those territories back? That was just insane! Nothing short of a collapse would make them give up all those conquered lands just like that.
That's like annexing 78% of your enemy and suddenly asking for peace, like wtf
Nerfing is needed to make timelines unfortunately
This is literally what happened in real life during the campaign of heraclius.
I think this had a surprisingly beautiful ending. I hope we can have a finished history of this new Republic of Greece as well
If Byzantine empire survived the invasion of the Ottoman Empire:
It doesn't make sense why they would change their name to "Greece", especially when they are the continuation of a 2500 year old nation.
The perfect world doesn’t exi
Calling the hre the holy german empire is really a violation 💀
WW1 borders way too similar to OTL, especially with both Austria (why is austria so large) and Germany (doubt they would form like that anyways, prussia only happened because the ERE fell) also romania existing is odd, wouldn't they be called something like Dacia? I mean, the ERE called themselves Rhomania anyways. Also colonization would look wayyy different or wouldn't happen at all if the Romans still existed. WW1 would never happen, the closest would be a great war esqu scenario if European powers somehow still became ontop, also the Romans would never call themselves "Byzantines", let alone "Greece". Realistically, if they still existed they'd name themselves Romania or something similar to that. Also they wouldn't be as powerful as portrayed in the video. By a certain point you're kind of conflating the Byzantines and Ottomans together and forgetting they were both different states and entities. Its a pipe dream for them to ever reclaim Syria, let alone all of Egypt and then push up into Hungary and Romania. Also Safavids forming is interesting. Dont know much of Persian history but I doubt they would form at all. Anyways, other than, its still a really good video. I love seeing alternative history of different empires, especially the Byzantines. Its really nice to see how creative people can be, keep up the good work brother 💯💯
Well you see, that's generally the problem with Alt-history, as we don't know 100% what would change and what would relatively stay the same.
@@yazovgaming I mean, yeah, but the point of alt history is to be alternative history, it's not necessary supposed to be too realistic, because alot of things happen OTL that realistically should never have happened or had very small chances too
Many of these videos are too afraid to try something different, they only feel comfortable changing the past but when it comes to the present they just fall back on what's already there instead of using theory imagination and creating an entirely new timeline that has some basis in reality
The Eastern Roman Empire wouldnt have lost so often later on, if they really survived untill the the 1700's with all their knowledge, they would have been THE worlds greatest superpower, they would have changed ww1 a lot, the ERE isnt the sick man of europe after all.
I mean, when the byzantines fell they were 1000-2000 (depending on how you count it) years old, i doubt age would play much of a significant factor in their survival
CONGRATS!!!
💯🎉🥳
Imagine if Greece had Anatolia irl crazy
The only aspect that I can respect about the work (which is otherwise confusing, sterile on a figurative, imaginative and creative level on a historical level) that doesn't even arouse interest... I point out that the only positive point that you have made with this video is "the music" (although it is still a copy and paste). But the rest, and the fantasy of telling that story is pure contempt for history, by not including and despising the history of a country so important in the history of the world, such as the Spain of the “Austrias “hasburgs”and the (bourbons), from the Middle Ages, with the reconquest and the expulsion of the Muslims from the Iberian Peninsula, through the influence that the discovery of America had in Europe with the decisive influence, at a strategic and geopolitical level that it had on the entire continent and therefore, in all the nations of Europe, and above all it is unforgivable with how decisive and influential was the Emperor Charles I of Spain and (V) fifth of Germany, (Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire), which you do not name at any time... nor be not even the fantasy that Philip II, king of the Spanish Habsburgs and king of Spain, had been born… (It is contemptuous towards Spain and absurd to ignore it in the history you have made…)… and without naming and excluding the 30 years war between Catholicism and Protestantism and ignoring Spain in the corresponding part that it was and in the relationship with Austria and until the 18th century.
Российская империя ни коода бы не воевала с винзантией они были бы союзникам и в первой мировой византия бы выступила против австрии за контроль на балканах
Ты это князю Олегу скажи
I wonder if you can make an all months version of all roman-germanic wars like you did regarding roman-persian wars. That would be very beautiful to see
Можно продолжение за Греческую республику до наших дней?
Bro stop it the ottomans and the Turks might get a heart attack
Amazing GG bro i love your content
This video is so intheresting❤❤❤❤
we want more videos like this
1:02:43 Greek maybe, but I don't think they'd call themselves Byzantine 😅
Will you continue with this alt TL what happens after the greek republic is created
Angelos Dynasty redemption arc?
will you do a continuation with the history of greece
Nice vid man could you make an alternate timeline of the Macedonian empire 😅
Nice video. Can you make alternative Ottoman Empire history?
Amazing 👏 🤩
The empire becoming a republic ruined the ending of the video
What year would be the greatest extent for Byzantium
W timeline
cringe ending
fr
Better than reality 🤣 Also the Assyrians, Egyptians, and the Kingdom of Jerusalem are Orthodox Christians here… ain’t that bad…
And maybe some Greek radicals will seek to reestablish Byzantium…
The flag looks here throughout their History rather disappointing… Romans had always a beautiful style… should have chosen the purple flag with the two headed eagle and the cross with the four B in the background…
Then The Ottomans(Turkiye) has no migrates to Anatoly😱
What is the song used at one hour and two minutes in that speaks of Historia?
Bro wouldnt the republic of greece at the end of the video still be roman as like they were byzantium or eastern rome but like, they just now call themselves greece? They would still be roman.
Very realistic
Looks like a megacampaign which is cool
I expected the Karasids but this is also good.
the good ending
What is music 44:00?
почему Византия воюет с Россией?
The not make sense place is why Byzantine only hold modern Greece territory not have more in Balkan
Cool!
It was more cool if Italy in the end became the new Roman country
What kings are these photos
Resumen: en territorios casi un Imperio Otomano 2.0
he went there he did it
What’s the music in the beginning it’s dope
Macedon Industrial Theme form Civ VI
LOL. You can only see Anatolia in your dreams.
so it's basicly the ottomans but greek version this time
cool
1:21:00 A Crimean war are no sens in this uchronia, even more with an EasternRoman and Russian alliance.
NOOOOO the end sucked i hated it
it's unlrealistic, plus their would still be Greeks living outside the borders in the balkans towards the end. This video is at the end the balkans borders look to similar to modern day
Its funny how the ending being similar to OTL doesn't make sense in the context of an otherwise great alt history. At the very least the Balkans, middle East, part of north Africa and central Europe (Germany and Hungry specifically) should be significantly altered.
Yeah, the entire reason Greece exists today as hellenic culture is because the byzantines fell and when Greece was trying to establish their independence they wanted to be seen as more western via adopting more Hellenic culture (anybody can correct me if im wrong) if the byzantines never fell there wouldn't be any need for that and they would just call themselves Romania or something similar to that, not Greece
I hear farya faraji
7:46
Roman Kalinka?
You shouldnt have made byzantium to greece, remove the title of roman empire and made byzantium into WW1, there was no reason to make byzantium go to the central powers. Crimean war shouldnt exist in this timeline since Byzantium and Russia would have been allies. I just don't know why you did this, but great effort for making 1933 maps tho
does anyone know the name of the song at 48:42?
Total War Attila, it’s in the description.
Ok its worth it!
I dont see the different between your video and the ottoman history
Maybe little bit
what is the prosperity indicator and what the colors mean?
That's what the byzantine empire should look like in the past. Erm but in early 1500s you forgot to make the byzantine grow bigger than the Ottoman empire. (not including crimea cuz it's the Russia empire's important ingredient, but including the southern remaining trunk part of the mamluk sultanate and the Atlantic ocean border of western Africa part from the mamluk sultanate.) erm and you kinda forgotten to add the Mongolian empire. And also Italy should be independent from the romans due to the western roman empire has collapsed. And in WW1 the byzantine empire should be on it's own side called "Byzantine Roman Powers (Gwaed* Pink)" and then in 1920 the byzantine empire would become a republic due to its slowly passing away from planet earth and in 1930 the byzantine republic now has disbanded and turned into Greece. And before the Pre Spanish civil war republic of Greece hand over Cyprus back to the UK and 50% of the East modern Turkey's land become independent simular to Serbia and called their country Turquia while Greece has still it's old ancient capital Constantinople and prepares to get ready for WW2 in support of the allies while the USSR is the red side on its own and once whole of South America joined as allies Turqua literally had a N__i bomb destroyed their buildings and became angry and became against from Germany and joined the allied powers with Greece. Italy's president got A____inated by the American spies and their new president to replace him decided to switch sides and change its flag back to the kingdom of Italy. Then N__i germany sent out F___ist Italy in the north and the Italian civil war began. Once the USSR and it's red army powers weakened Germany the Us & British empire allies annexed F__ist Italy and the kingdom of Italy (South Italy) reunited after the F__ist defeat. Then Kingdom of Italy and Turqua rescued Republic of Greece and reunited Kingdom of yugoslavia before the Soviets invade yugoslavia. And when all the nations captured Berlin Austria rebels N__i germany and joins the allies and N__i Germany falls and become defeated. The Soviets were literally retreated from upper Central Germany and the us allies enter and border Berlin with the Ussr army. The ussr will let Yugoslavia occupy the mouth of weimar Germany's Prussia land. And kaliningrad gets split by yugoslavia, Lithuania and USSR below Poland. And everyone lives happily ever after from WW2 Allied & USSR victory. The End.
Why is there not a single clash with the Habsburgs and Venice and an alliance with the Safavids in 1739? Byzantium had a very weak fleet, why did it include islands?! But the main question is why the eastern territories were not captured by the Mongols: Hulagu and Timur? Especially Timur, because for him the destruction of Byzantium and its population (yes, genocide) means gaining absolute authority in the Islamic world and restoring the Caliphate.
Epic
Bruh give me my 1 hour and 26 mins back