Top 10 Important Eastern Roman Emperors: Part 1 Ft. @Autocrat
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- For Autocrat's video about the 10 most infamous emperors, you can find it here: TBR
Email
easternromanhistory@gmail.com
Discord
/ discord
If you would like to support Eastern Roman History, I have a Patreon:
/ easternromanhistory
All images used are for educational purposes, if I have used a piece of art and you would like me to credit you, please contact me and I shall do so.
Thank you for having us ! 😊
Yo john 2nd complete ur campaign in Anatolia bro
@@rickyyacine4818 Right after I get Antioch to stop being a pain...
@@autocratpodcast JOHN, DON'T GO HUNTING IN CILICIA, JOHN DON,T USE THAT ARROW!
Thank you very much, I really enjoyed making it with you and Cassie.
@@EasternRomanHistory can u criticise Manuel the first because I feel like his like luis 14 he flew with empire too much to the sun and fell miserably after his death he gone the exact opposite than his father he wasted too much on the west and gain nothing because dalmatia fell after year and the turks in 1182 to 1183 ad as soon Manuel died retoke southern west Anatolia and Manuel relayed on useless vassalige yet the turks were at that time in 1160s by giving them time to recover they were devied and kilije arslan toke the danishman turks state with no air I mean if Manuel thought he gonna have it his lying on himself he wasted his father work on nothing
All his western gain failed so fast yet his father and grandfather gains in Anatolia lasted till 1328 ad
I would descript Manuel as the sand builder meaning all the thing he build
In his time colopased so fast after his death meaning it was never build that strong anyway
Always a good day when a new Eastern Roman History vid drops
Great video! I really enjoyed the list of these important Emperors of Romania. Justinian is always a great choice because he was restless and ambitious and his conquests were facilitated by his talented generals Belisarios, Narses the Armenian, Artabanes, and Mundos, etc. Further, his successors, specifically Maurikios, an important Emperor, because he really put in work to maintain Justinian's conquests and keep peace with Persia. However, his hindsight was his officer Phokas who betrayed him. I think Maurikios was a very good Emperor, even if he was somewhat stern, but he was doing it for the best of Romania against the barbarians. Finally, I think that Micheal III has been very underrated because of his reputation. He certainly deserves more digging as he is still controversial with his relationship to Basileios I and his mistress Eudokia Ingerina whose son Leo VI's heritage is very disputed.
Thank you very much. I think Tiberius II and Maurice really show that the expanded empire of Justinian I could survive his death, under careful management. It really need to avoid civil war and another protracted war with Persia to really recover. unfortunately both of those things happened.
I have in fact done a video exploring the relationship of Michael III to Basil I, which you can find here:ua-cam.com/video/HWyolm2Cl2Y/v-deo.html
I think my top 5 most IMPORTANT Eastern Roman emperors would be:
1) Constantine the Great - Pretty self explanatory. There is no eastern Roman empire without him. Nevermind the expansion of the solidus and promotion of Christianity.
2) Justinian - His attempts to reconquer the west arguably overextended the empire, but they did lead to an imperial presence being maintained in Italy until 1071. The law code and construction of the Hagia Sophia were important too and remained relevant for a long, long time after Justinian died.
3) Constantine IV - He allowed for the empire to survive by ending the mutiny in Sicily and breaking the Arab blockade of Constantinople, before then putting the empire on the offensive again via support for the Mardaites. He also brought the controversy over Monotheletism to an end but failed to stop the Bulgars establishing themselves in the Balkans, who would become a bitter rival for the rest of the empires history.
4) Alexios Komnenos - It was Alexios who began the empires dangerous relationship with the west via the Crusades but also saved the empire in one of it's darkest hours, allowing it to then become a powerful, important force during the 12th century. Also important as he turned the empire into an aristocracy closely centered around the imperial family that lasted until the very end, which had mixed results for the state.
5) John VI Kantakouzenos - But not for the best reasons. If it wasn't for him the Ottomans would have never entered Europe and the empire wouldn't have been severely weakened. His reign coincided with the power sapping Black Death and the Italians becoming dominant over the economy.
Why go to therapy if you can have therapy at home.
Thank you man. I'd love to see a coop between Eastern Roman History and Schwerpunkt
A good video, all in all. I like the general theme of your picks, highlighting and reexamining various emperors that ruled at important inflection points of the empire, and were previously maligned, for reasons that were largely out of their control- I particularly enjoyed your overview of Theodosius the Second, as I had known about his accomplishments, however, it had not clicked together in my mind that he may have been quite competent despite his poor reputation.
But even still- no shoutout to the most quietly competent emperor- Anastasius? Every opportunity is a good opportunity to sing the praises of Anastasius.
no such thing as a byzantine empire this guy keeps refencing
Based
i love st justinian st constantine the great and st basil the bulgar slayer still need to learn more about everyone else
Ooh, this seems like it'll be interesting!
Justinian conquest without mention of bellisarius? Done with this stream
“As a historical phenomenon, this ‘Greek Roman Empire’ represented the fulfillment of over a thousand years of the progressive extension of Greek culture.”
Fergus Millar, A Greek Roman Empire : power and belief under Theodosius II (408/450). Sather classical lectures ; v. 64. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006
"By late antiquity, there was a single Greco-Roman Empire, but perhaps today we see more clearly the continuity of its dual nature than the ancients did. Both civilizations co-existed and both survived through the Middle Ages down to the present day;"
RONALD MELLOR, THE CONFRONTATION BETWEEN GREEK AND ROMAN IDENTITY, p.118
"However, it is clear that the essence of being a Romaios does not change when it shifts to Graikos or Hellen. It is the same ethnic group."
Christos Malatras, The making of an ethnic group: the Romaioi in the 12th-13th centuries
Although John the 3rd Doukas Vatatzis was not Constantinoupole's emperor , but Nikaia's , he was for sure a Great, if not the greatest.
Alexios Komnenos gave extra time to the Empire, but Venice managed to be the leader of the trade in Roman Empire for years to come, because of Alexios' urgent politics with them.
Could you please do a video on Manuel Komnenoses Banner, l heard that it was quite elaborate and cant find any information for it, it would be an interesting video.
Really enjoyed listening to this!
Waiting patiently for part 2!
We got the Pope doing Popey things ? Hahahaha you crack me up
This emperors are overrated anyway except leo 3rd :
Here is my unpopular opinion list
John 1st (the most potential one)
Leo 5th (most savy one)
Zeno (most survivor one)
Tibirus 3rd ( most adoptive one )
Justin 1st ( most balanced one )
Leo 4th (most warrior one)
Isaac 1st ( most unlucky one )
These Emperors are certainly underrated, specifically Zeno (fifth century) and Tiberios II (sixth century). Isaakios I Komnenos had a very short reign, unfortunately.
@@danielbenitez-kz3iz not Tiberius 2nd I meant third one from 698 ad to 705 ad
Alexis isn't overrated.
@@waltonsmith7210 he kinda is he save and doomed the empire with Venice and crusades and sacrificed Byzantine sovereignty for few military assistance
Basil the second is the greatest Eastern Roman emperor .
I think the empire fell because of the introduction of the mustache and I do not think that had gotten enough focus or discussion. Exactly. I imagine you’re speechless because mustache… fear not. I think the mustache needs a closer examination. Not mine tho it’s on my upper lip.
Hope this subject is further researched and more. We’ve all had our lips tickled by the greatness of the mustache. Celts? German? Helvetische? Scythians or Huns? Where did it arise? Besides the upper lip below yer nose
Love that you choose Constans II
Huns? Deutscher? Helvetischer? Celt? Scythians? Where did the mustache begin and where did everything begin to fall upon the introduction of the mustache?
Alexius was the most impressive. He got knocked down, but always got up again.
Like a medieval tub thumper.
He drinks a vino drink, and thats about it.
When i hear Justinian think of a coward. Belisarius deserved better.
I understand that Belisarius did rather well out of his friendship with Justinian.
@@EasternRomanHistory belisarius proved his loyalty time and time again just so justinian could doubt him time and time again. The two times belisarius was sent of in disgrace because justinian didn’t trust him. Belisarius deserved better.
Thanks for the very interesting and informative video!
In my opinion, it would also be a fruitful time to discuss among experts the reigns of the following emperors (often unjustly neglected or controversial despite their achievements).
-Leo IV
-Michael II
-John I
-Theodoros II
-Michael VIII
-Andronikos III
-John VI
-John VII
-John VIII
I have in fact done a discussion of emperor John VI, which you can find here: ua-cam.com/video/fgL5FgFD41k/v-deo.html
Any list of important Eastern Roman Emperors that doesn't include Constantine I is incomplete. He founded New Rome. There would be no Eastern Roman Empire lasting for another 1000 years without him.
The only reason not to include him would be because he also ruled the west, but that seems like an arbitrary reason to me.
I did originally plan to talk about Constantine I but swapped him with Romanos I simply because I wanted to throw some light on this emperor, whereas, in my mind at least, it is self-evident how important Constantine I was for the Roman Empire.
Looking forward to the next episode!
On of the best videos about late Roman history.
Thank you very much.
Where is the art from that thumbnail from?
I found it on the internet, I am afraid I do not know who created it.
@@EasternRomanHistoryI found the source, it’s from a Bulgarian history website.
@@Ragumeatsauce Nice, I suppose that makes sense with the second Bulgarian empire.
in history couldn't emperors like Alexios 3,4 or ioannis 5 to be considered as importand for the future of the empire
We will be talking about these infamous emperors in the next part.
Andronikus I or Phokas are a dead heat for detrimental Emporers for me.