The Late Roman, Early Byzantine Infantryman (Fall of the Roman Empire History)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- The Late Roman, Early Byzantine Infantryman (Fall of the Roman Empire History)
Follow me on instagram
/ epimetheus_history
Support more videos like this
/ epimetheus1776
Sources
Larousse Encyclopedia of Ancient and Medieval History(Marcel Dunan)
the late roman infantryman (Simon MacDowall)
Roman Legionary AD 284-337(Ross Cowan)
byzantium beyond the golden gate
fall of the west (John Lambshead)
Late Roman Cavalryman (simon macdowall)
Tags:
Byzantine, Byzantine empire, byzantine documentary, roman army documentary, Fall of the roman empire, ancient rome, late roman empire, ancient roman history, western roman empire, eastern roman empire, late roman infantryman, Byzantine empire crash course, Roman legion, Byzantine history, roman Sassanid, limitanei, comitatenses, Diocletian, roman tactics, foederati, late roman army,paltina, Justinian, history of rome,
![True Size of a Byzantine Army [c. 900 AD] 3D DOCUMENTARY](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jE48hMEGlPI/mqdefault.jpg)
If you enjoyed this video, checkout my video on Republican Roman infantry: ua-cam.com/video/APuh6rokd_w/v-deo.html
You sound suspiciously like The Shogunate
First time to the channel, very impressed. Also, interesting choice of channel name.
Rome had a history of abandoning tactics and methods of war when they were deem ill suited for the job that the Roman Army needed to provide. The Imperial Legions built by Marius were designed to fight large and wealthy empires and conquer land for Rome whilst Diocletian's reforms were designed to keep the Empire together in a cost effective manner. Why have an Army built for conquest when you're at the limits of your expansion?
It's kinda funny considering the fact that even Augustus the one who started the period of pax romana was worried about overstretching. One example of useless conquest was the island of Britain that rebeled constantly and didn't gave the Romans many advantages.
@@bogdan3386 Britain was full of natural resources like gold, tin, and copper, as well as wool and other goods.
@@histguy101 yeah but like I've said it was a very unstable province that being one of the reasons why it was abandoned so quickly in the 5th century and using those human resources to try to defend other frontiers. It doesn't matter how rich it a territory if it's hard to govern and the corruption is very high it's worthless. The reason Britain was occupied was because Claudius needed a military conquest to help his reputation but he couldn't conquer Germany because it was to big or Parthia so he needed an easier target.
Very well said DuckSwagington
That being said, if Rome had put their minds to the task, and tried to permanently hold all of Britain, the island might have been eventually pacified. That in turn would have made the empire much stronger since the island wouldnt have had to be so militarized.
Man the decay of the Roman Empire with its symptoms sure is painful to watch...
Warhammer chaos symbols,,,Blood for the blood god.
Burn! You HERETICS! 😂😂👍
@@masterforge5957 The Emperor Protects :3
...skulls for the skull throne!
@@jedidiahfite5960 Long Live the most powerful Chaos God
SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
FOR KHORNE
I love your illustrations! Thank you for putting so much effort into providing us with accurate images!
Great video! not many people talk about what kind of infantry the Byzantines used except for the Varengi Guard which were Viking mercenaries.
Love that Warhammer 40k Chaos symbol reference at 1:01 lol.
This is one of the best description of the late roman army on the net.. Thanks.. It seems like that in spite of their change in armour and tactics as you point out, they were as efficient as the previous imperial armies. It looks as though the late roman army was a combinaison of earlier Western military unit organisation along with Ancient Greek infantry influences. They could defeat cavalry charges with their hoplite type formation using a germanic oval longer schield with leg protection and longer spears. Also the use of skirmishers is a reminder of the peltast which were widely used by the Athenians and Alexander..
Brother I really liked this video! Thanks for confirming what I had long believed.
Glad you enjoyed it JOhn! :)
Excellent presentation of a subject not usually discussed
Super Super Cool! Most quality and holistic video on this subject I’ve watched!
That's good basic and high quality info. Good work.
Asking why Rome lasted for so long is one of the best questions.
3:44 I love chain armours.I want to have one of these in my wardrobe.
Well the chain armours were very cost efficient compared to the segmentata that was harder to produce and you needed more materials to make them, contrary to popular beliefs the most used type of armour in the Roman army even in the second century was still chain mail that was as efficient (providing the same type of protection) than the segmentata and more cheaper.
Just order one online www.ringmesh.com/LARP-CosPlay-Chainmail-s/3.htm
You can buy them online, but make sure to find riveted mail armour, you can buy butted mail armour as it's cheaper if you want it only for the looks but if you want historical and effective armour get riveted.
@@bogdan3386 chain mail does not protect from arrows, segmentata was introduced in order to fight against the partians. Anyway, nothing is sure about the real utilization of plate armour among roman heavy infantry...
I love this.
Omg thank you I’ve wanted this information for so long. It’s challenging to research online
Watching your videos makes it 10x harder trying to quit playing MTW2!
Damn you, and your interesting videos, Epimetheus!
Really great vid!!! You improved greatly over time !!! And i like your choices of subjects, really interesting topics as always, i dont know if its possible for you to cover more economic and administrative subjects from time to time, like this one which touches on these aspects.
Well done. Excellent video.
great video!
Thanks a lot. it is sometimes hard to visualize this period of time because there are so fewer references.
This was really informative! Thank you!
Nice content subscribed.
Actually the Byzantinians are a favourite of mine, I wrote a term treatise about Byzantinian history during my 3rd class at Middle school. Their military services were less flamboyant and decorative than in the West but so much more practical and economical in spite of very well-paid soldiers. They had remarkably efficient armament - inventing the couched lance technique later used by knights. They had a awesome powerful navy - heard about Greek Fire anyone? Their diplomacy has spun off a ditty alive even today: "When Greeks are bringing gifts..." They were adept with psy-ops too, they could be sadistically brutal when it was deemed useful and courteous respect when that was better. All in all, a very frustrating enemy!
GREAT WORK. 😀😀🙃
I learned more about the Roman Army. May I suggest different kinds of technology used by Roman Army used overtime.
More thanks haves seen alot of vids on UA-cam and before that alot book and played total war just love the roman history
The Rome total war game and Barbarian invasion expansion is neat in the sense that it referenced these changes in the Roman army. In the first game you recruit Hastati, Principles and Triarii. Then Marian reforms come and you can't recruit them anymore, must train different types of legionary cohorts. Then in Barbarian Invasion expansion you train Littani, Commitanses and Foederati. I probably butchered those names now lol. Anyway MORE GERMANS!
Great vids brother👍
Don't forget Battle of Himera (409 BC) to involve in tunnel warfare, which Hannibal sent sappers, who dug tunnels under the walls and collapsed sections of it by setting fire to the wooden support beams. You can check history record about Battle of Himera (409 BC) through Wikipedia. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Himera_(409_BC)
Well done Sir!
The helmets shown on the palatini with what looks like a visor, interests me.
Awesome video! Been playing age of empires 2. Lol
Late Roman infantry were partly a response to changing enemies. The Classic Marius and Imperial Legionnaire was optimized to fight only other infantry, which was 90% of what it fought as it expanded the Empire in Europe and around the Mederterranean. From Carthage to Greece to Spain, Gaul, Germany and Britain, the Romans rarely encountered enemy cavalry. All that changed when Rome tried expanding eastwards and encountered the Parthians in Iran, who used horse archers and heavy cavalry. The Roman legions which so easily beat infantry armies couldn't do much against these enemy troop types and were promptly slaughtered. Rome was never able to conquer much of Iran as a result. Ironically the Greeks and Macedonians had a far more balanced spear heavy army hundreds of years earlier due to the fact they were used to fighting with and against large cavalry formations, but that made them weak against the sword armies of Rome who conquered them but failed to incorporate some of the eastern styles of warfare the Greeks had learned. In turn, the Roman scissors of "sword" finally met the "rock" of cavalry and the days of the traditional Legionnaire tactics were numbered as Rome faced more and more cavalry heavy armies from the East like the Sassanians and Huns. The late roman infantryman, more lightly armored and mobile, marked a return to the older spear and bow based formations of the past just as the heyday era of heavy cavalry and the knight was dawning. It was the right type of army for the times and enemies Rome now faced.
Hey Epimetheus can you do history of Italy??
A couple of things: Comitatenses varied in discipline and training depending on when and where they were.
A unit in the time of a successful emperor who are likely to see action? Much more disciplined that, say, the last 20 years of the Empire.
Also, calling that sword a spatha is technically not historically accurate. Rome kept calling it a gladius, and many of the finds show their blades to be thinner and more tapered than the earlier cavalry spatha. Some even almost resemble early rapiers. My point is, the sword was still likely primarily for thrusting, they just wanted more range on it.
I'm curious as to what kind of armor the Palatini are wearing in the artwork. That helmet looks rad as hell and I'd like to find one.
I would love to see your take on development of firearms in history and how it influenced armies of certain era. The great example of that would be Sweden and Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth in 17 century. One country created created an army that laid the foundations of modern warfare. The other one still primarily used cavalry but organised and equipped so well they often outmatched one woud say more advanced army.
good stuff
Good video
Why does my heart ache everytime I watch the fall of the Roman empire. I'm not even a Roman nor originated from the west. Oh Constantinople
Excellent summary. I would only add that the sack of Constantinople by the fourth crusade in 1204 (and the 50 year Latin Kingdom that was imposed on it, before the Byzantines recaptured the city) so weakened the defenders in number and resources that conquest by the Turks became inevitable.
1:01 Roman Legions against Warhammer chaos marauders and their horde of foul mutated creatures. Now that would be a thing.
Would have been nice to hear more about the soldiers themselves, how they were equipped and how they fought. If we're going to say they were an important adaptation to the roman legionnaire we should at least have a little context
I'm on the second book of a series called "Legionary" by Gordon Doherty about soldiers in the Eastern late Roman Empire. If you find this interesting you'll love the books. Lot of familiar terms and names in there. Definitely worth checking out.
Nice
Imagine getting a plot of land large enough to sustain yourself after 20 years of work on top of your wage... Especially considering that they weren't constantly deployed. I'd be first in line lol
Epimetheus! Really nice history lesson! It's nice to see these many topics in short videos,
could you make one about Basque or one about the difference between Goths, Visigoths and Ostrogoths?
I wonder how these didn't last in the medieval times...
I expected a mention of Varangian Guards but I guess they were just a group of elite mercenaries and not part of the military doctrine?
I think Trajon is my favorite Roman Emperor, but so little information is available vs the other baddies of the empire (like Caligula etc).
This video taught me that no matter how famous you become, when people make your looks live through the ages with statues, still nobody will ever know what your nose looked like.
You are using Osprey's material as sources. Cool.
The are few things I like more in this world than nice Roman uniform. Just screams ancient world. Great video on a complicated subject!
I see "Late Roman" anything, I click. Thank you, sir!
*Late Roman weiners* *You: 'Damnit' - Click*
"I'm a simple man. I see Roman Infantry... i click"
The new clickbait.
I see Roman Republic- I click
@Tornike Kvachantiradze *laughs in democracy*
I cry everytime I hear 1453 mentioned. Press F to pay respects
F
F
Abu Zayd ibn Haytham al Shaami looks like someone needs some democracy
@@retvrntotradition4454 xD best way to trigger these people, hahahah.
F
I always knew the Late Roman soldier never got enough love.
Bruh late roman empire is cooler. It reminds me of warhammer. Someone hanging on for so long when all the odds are against them
Whats the stoey of your profile picture? Arabic/Persian N?
personally marius's mules of the late republic and early empire are way way cooler than the late soldiers. they could build they could march they had one of the most iconic and recognizable armors of all time.
@@yasharjamali2137 If you're talking about Mike Tacos' Profile pic, its a character from a video game.
@@emrysmyridden You're not doing anything but stating the most common opinion on Roman Armies. Yeah the Marius reforms had the most successful army in ancient history but just because they could do stuff like build and march, the latter is literally the most common thing to all armies so I don't know why you use that of all things to describe them, others have said it was an army meant for conquering and would have been too slow and inflexible to handle the problems facing the Empire during the crisis of the third century and the later migration period and especially the Hunnic invasions. The Late Roman army worked for the time it was made and was in part why it survived as long as it did because it was flexible and more mobile. It had it's issues and could not match the Early Imperial legions but that's more to do with the Empire itself being in a far worse state to supply and arm it's soldiers than anything else which should make them more impressive because despite those limitations they kept it going for centuries later, especially in the east.
I just want to comment something for perspective, and that's this:
With Byzantium as a continuation of the Roman empire, it is safe to say that the glory of Rome ended in just less than 40 years before Columbus set sail to the Americas. Just think about that for a moment. I find it very impressive.
"Byzantium" wasn't the continuation of the Roman Empire. It was the Roman Empire.
Maybe the real roman empire (elite) never in fact ended, it morphed to something new and stay hidden from sight.
The Romans were still "Roman" after they became Christian, but theirs cultural beliefs and values differ from eachother.
@@GriseGaot As long as Latin and Greek remain embedded in western law and philosophy, Rome and the Greek speaking Byzantium which succeeded it, will live on in some form.
_whispers in third rome_
Well in a way the catholic church is the continuation of the roman empire to this day
The late roman legionaries are a perfect example of what made the Roman military so successful: adaptation. The Kingdom of Rome in the 500's B.C. utilized Hoplites, but later on in the era of the republic abandoned it in favour of the manipular system to more effectively battle other Italic and Hellenic nations. Then, when it seemed that the manipular formation no longer provided a tactical edge, the Marian reforms created the iconic legionary: a perfect conquering army. But that era ended too, so a conquering army was no longer what the empire needed, especially since said army had a way of influencing politics to the point where the Emperor's guards murdered several emperors. What the late Roman Empire needed was a defensive army, and that's exactly what the late legionaries were: a wall between the civilians and the invading barbarian tribes.
The walls were destroyed with the invention of cannons thou by the ottoman empire. Where roman empire seek to conquer the state or nation they have defeated. The Ottoman empire only destroy and loot and does'nt stay on the enemy's territory therefore not wasting resources on conquering it. It is based on History channel documentary of fall of Roman empire.
@@danmichaelabad6263 I don't know about that! The Ottomans stayed in my country for nearly 500 years. Far longer than the Romans or the Byzantines
@@vlad.vasilev.94 Please excuse me sir. Since your name is in cyrillic alphabet, would you be from Bulgaria?
Precisely, my man! That is the main reason why Rome lasted so long: adaptation. They saw flaws and they fixed them with a better foreign counterpart. You forgot how the Romans basically stole Greek boats!
Maybe too many babaruan tribes man
I totally disagree with common opinion, that the Late Roman infantrymen were worse than their previous counterparts before Diocletian. They're just ... different. Focused on defence tactics, with more universal weaponry as bows, spears and some barbarian equipment, and usually more flexible than classic legionnaires. But claim that they were "worse" comes from complete ignorance of their new role on battlefields. I think that there are two reasons of such situation: 1) Late Roman Period is completely unknown for people, and generally not popular in movies/games etc. 2) We usually connect Late Roman Army with period of Western Roman Empire collapse, and believe that it happened because of military incompetence, but this process was much more complicated and caused rather by internal factors, rather than war failures. Anyway thanks for this video, it's always pleasant to watch something about this misundestood period of Roman history!
Thanks for the great comment!
I agree. I believe the more we discover about this period and the more it is researched a greater appreciation for the late Roman military will only grow more, and how much they influenced Medival military doctrine. Most empires in history have crumbled with half the problems the later Romans survived through.
@Crimson they were more versatile
Byzantine Tagmata were definitely equal to legionaries of Augustus and wore superior armor.
Crimson, Yes the Byzantine Army Of 900-1040 was on a level of that ofAugustus Rome. In This Period the Empire moved back to Full time professional Tagmata Troops from the Semi Professional thematic troops. Your standard Professional Byzantine Soldier would be armored in leather padding with chain mail over and later Lamellar over that. Byzantine Leather and Lamellar making were the best in the world only China could compare.
Check out Framing The Early Middle Ages. It is a monumental work that has set forth legitimate revisionism towards the Transition not Fall view.
1204 and 1453... *I cry everytiem* ;_;
Ludovice why?
@@dushshhsbsbshsb7799 1204 the 4th crusade happened, the crusaders sacked and burned Constantinople to the ground. in 1453 the Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople finally ended the Roman Empire.
Youre telling me
@@dcactus100 Slavs were native in illiricum.
@@MirkicGames what ??? no they weren't they came (where let to live there for taxes) in the 5th century that's well documented and a fact quit making shit up.
a great video I am always disappointed that there is always so little shown of the byzantine empire. there should be more tv shows made that are set there. You said that Constantinople fell in 1453, its amazing to think that some one 10 years old then and probably would have thought of themselves as a Roman, forget there term for it would have still only been 40 when America was discovered. who knows maybe won of the seamen on Columbus's ships could have been from Constantinople and so a Roman would have set foot on America. (well almost)
That sounds like that would be a great movie :D
Exactly! So little about it. I think it's due to the fact that majority of people from western Europe cannot quite identify with East Romans, unlike with classic Romans, and the Slavs were mostly 'barbaric' tribes same as the Germans... And there was this tension between east/west Europe empires at that time
Aside from carrying the Roman culture forward by a 1000 years the Eastern Romans contributed very little in any other area of development. No great inventions, art, music, or even construction technique. If any thing could be attributed to the Byzantine Empire it would be in proof of the survivability of a well developed bureacracy and it's ability to hold unchanging for 1000 years an entire empire.
@@wendysimer1661 Duude... Byzantines "contributed" many things! Off the top of my head, Haigia Sophia, greek fire, mosaics, stratego system, Greek Orthodoxy, the words Kaiser and Tsar, the modern country of Russia or Rus.... come on, please open a book sometime bro
@@wendysimer1661 Please go read a book. Have you ever heard of Justinian's Code? Which is very influential to the U.S.'s legal system today
Not near enough credit is given to the Eastern Romans
Emperor's Men has a German Cruiser from 1913 going back in time to 378
It turns out you can make Bronze Cannons and Grenades
The Eastern Roman Empire manned the walls shielding Europe until they had stronger kingdoms, states. They dealt with and took the full brunt of the the Sassanids, the rise of Islam and its conquests. At this time, I don't think anything west or north of the ERE was ready to deal with that. The Western Roman Empire was long gone. The rest of Europe was divided up into small little kingdoms.
By the time Constantinople fell in 1453, Europe had gotten a lot stronger, and would only continue to grow in power.
Really, if it wasn't for the ERE, I'd say a lot more of Europe would have been Islamic states.
@@Warmaker01 Yeah! Arabs had to go through Spain, and through the sea. All just because constantinople was there.
They failed miserably. And when Constantinople fell, THERE WAS VIENA!
@Hammody Ahmed Tho ottomans were not as religious fanatics as the arabs, they would have promoted muslim religion in europe had they triumphed. Also, ottoman monarchs...
@Hammody Ahmed Your point makes no sense. So the otomans were more radical than the Arabs? They are still a muslim state I'm not comparing the brutality of the conversion, I say that the muslims were stopped, also in Vienna
Belisarius Best Boi, Theodora Best Girl, and Justinian was clearly the Main Character. It's a shame we'll never get a reboot, as the current seasons are just a pale imitation of the original. Hellas can't even get itself out of debt and Phrygia is run by some wannabe Dictator. And don't even get me started on Illyria.
ConriDubhghail,Justinian is overrated and screwed over the Empire.
@@tylerellis9097 He certainly is a bit overrated, and it's entirely possible if he hadn't overreached in his ambitions the Empire would be better off. I still love the story of his reign.
ConriDubhghail, I agree his story is great him bankrupting the empire, stretching the Empires manpower and destroying Italy isn’t.
He should have just destroyed the vandals and called it a day. Then his successor could move in while the Ostrogoths dealt with the Lombards.
@@tylerellis9097 Oh come on! Justinian had to deal with a climate catastrophe resulting from three volcanic eruptions in short succession causing crippling famines, as well as the freaking plague wiping out a quarter of the Mediterranean population. No matter whether the Byzantine economy overstretched because of his conquests, it would have tanked anyway thanks to Justinian getting screwed over by catastrophic circumstances completely out of his control!
Dschehuti Nefer, he lost against the Sassanids, lost multiple times to the Ostrogoths, was not forced to invade the goths and screwed over Bellasarius multiple times. Nah a different Emperor like Anastasius would have not attacked the Ostrogoths and get involved in a Visigoth war.
Wasn't Justin Justinian's uncle?
You are right. But he was also his adoptive father. So not biological father :)
Justice Beaver
Justin was some kind of villiger and rude guy whose politics were led by Justinian the Great
So that's Justin Bieber got his name
Your BEST video, awesome subjest, the animations are wonderful and the question at the amazing. Well we should have a video about the thematic army. Kudos for pronuncing Βελισάριος correctly.
:D Thank you Argyrus!
Who cares
ERIC CARTMAN CARTMAN how does it feel to be an asshole? Asking for a friend.
Belisarius correct pronunciation would be the Latin one, not the Greek
No. The greek is the correct one.
I’ve always been so curious about this time period and the soldiers of the day. I can never find much information on what the soldiers were like and what they wore. Majorian is my favorite late Roman emperor.
One problem with the Byzantines in particular is that they went through an iconoclastic phase where they destroyed any image depicting human beings for religious reasons. Therefore a lot of the primary source material for how their soldiers would have been equipped is most likely lost.
John Alejandro He’s good but his JUSTINIAN SMASH destroyed Italy.
John Alejandro, Justinian destroyed Italy, Bankrupted the Empire and left no way for his successors to defend his gains.
Haris Manou, no where in my comment it does it say he destroyed the Roman Empire
Also it was 639 years till 1204.
Haris Manou, Lol no the Ostrogoths were extremely Romanized and until Justinian were Roman vassals with the support of the Italian people and the Roman Senate.
Justinians tug of war with the Ostrogoths completely destroyed the peninsula as cities were recaptured and sacked multiple times until Narses destroyed the Ostrogoths.
He also Bankrupted the Empire and stretched its troops in Italy and Iberia while the Balkans and Anatolia were being raided.
Constantine saved the Empire and is Criminally underrated.
Time to play Rome Total War Barbarian Invasion... again
Attila total war*
@@diadokhoi5722 Attila runs like poo. Sad the developers abandoned the game so early on
Time to run Mount and blade warband rome mod
I’ve been waiting for someone to make a video on this for a long time. Thank you!
I've been waiting on someone to do a video on Byzantine infantry. There has been so much focus on the Kataphractoi that the footmen tend to get forgotten
:)
Its Roman, byzantine is a made up term by 16th century historians
Varangian Guard was the elite infantry corps during the Byzantine period. Palatini were esentially the same as Kataphracti. I'd go so far as to bet on Palatini becoming known as Kataphracti in the Byzantine period.
My favourite are Voukelarioi guards of general belisarius
Manpower is the edge. But bro, your videos are are amazing. More informating than entertaining. Why because you stick with info. Don't change that. Keep entertaining our minds.
I am fron Greece and love Rome and Roman civilization, in fact we are cousins thats why we were so close and Greeks helped the Roman Empire, we are the eastern Rome
@Türk back to Mongolia
Shame the Romans in that time (depends on wich period) thought negative things about the Greeks.
@@ls200076umm no? Not ever?
@@ls200076
The Minority during the Punic Wars disliked Greeks.
Epithemeus I appreciate you and ALL of your content! From the Hittites to the the “Late Romans,” to the Chinese you cover it all and with wonderful sources and accuracy! Keep it up brother, I actually get excited when I see a new Empithemeus post 👌
:D Thanks Brady!
Not "Byzantine Empire" , it's false...
True, "Roman Empire" or "Eastern Roman Empire!"
But aren't they Greek? How could they named Roman even though they aren't Latin.
@@ebubekirbayram9532 the term "Byzantine Empire" was made up a while after its fall to differentiate it from the classical Roman Empire, the Byzantines themselves or their contemporaries at the time never used the term. At the time, whether or not others acknowledged it, the Byzantines considered themselves Romans and called themselves the Roman Empire or, less officially (usually unofficial but this name does appear in a few official documents), Romania (not to be confused with the country that spawned in the territory of Dacia)
@@vynonyoutube1418 it's still a useful term as it let's us highlight the vast military, territorial and cultural differences between the Roman and late roman empires. Nothing wrong with the word "byzantine"
@@vynonyoutube1418 "Roman" was a political term of legitimacy , so the Emperor was Roman and thus superior to every king . The Eastern Empire was Greek , especially after Heraclius , although even most of the emperors before him were Greek or half Greek. Byzantium is the Greek city predecessor of Constantinople. Constantine wanted to rely on Greeks and Christians and thus made this city capital of the empire.
Then to muddy things further there was the "Holy Roman Empire" which kept that name centuries after Italy was no longer part of the territory.
Totally agree, Roman infantry is what let the Empire live so much. The hunger for power, internal betrayals, bad diplomacy, and failure to romanize certain tribes is what I think lead to Rome's fall. Slowly but surely. Great video 👍!
Actually I would I argue that diplomacy played the opposite role and is one of the main reasons that the empire survived until the 15th century. Actually it’s insane if you read about it of how much competent the Byzantine emperors and court was at diplomacy in specific periods.
I think you kinda forgot something: they didn't fail at Romanization. As a matter of fact they Romanized every barbarian they can find that at times you'll find Kings as Battlefield commanders, Princes as bureaucrats, and freemen as Soldiers. Over the years they effectively trained their future enemies through contempt and racism that they forgot to give them Citizenship.
Every barbarian surrounding Rome was just as Roman as a citizen from Ravenna. It's why they easily cut a path towards Spain and Toulouse after Flavius Stilicho's death.
The Roman foot was 11 inches rather than 12 inches for the modern foot. The Roman height requirement was actually something like 5 foot 5 inches (165cm 5'5") and the average height was 170 cm (5'7"). -The Logistics of the Roman Army at War: 264 BC-AD 235 by Roth, Jonathan
The Late and Byzantine Empires are my favorite parts of Roman History
Well Christianity wasn't that big of a problem especially in the late roman empire when the Roman state was already doomed the main issue for the collapse of the romans was the slave based economy that lead to the Marian reforms and after to the crisis of the 3rd century so basically the army and the generals were the biggest problem in the empire. The Romans were so stupidly arogant that even in the late empire they believed that they are still the superpower. Sometimes things are doomed from the beginning.
Nom Anor Um how did Christianity weaken Rome? Rome was weakening before it became the main faith.
@Nom Anor
In my opinion Rome at it's peak during Trajans time would've crushed any islamic invaders
Nom Anor Take over from without? Why would they need to? By the time the Germans began to take over the population of rome had been Christian for some time. And Rome didn’t become poor and corrupt because of Christianity, only a fool (like you) would think that. The seeds of its defeat were planted in the severan dynasty (pagans) who fucked the economy up in order to pay for the army. And that during the crisis of the third century the empire nearly murdered fucked itself into oblivion. And it’s not like every year under the rule of pagans was all hunky dory, the time between the third Punic war and the rise of Octavian was a time of stagnation, corruption, and instability.
Nom Anor Yes it did enter a golden age but your previous comment made it seem like nothing was ever wrong with pre Christian Rome and that it was perfect until those meddling Christians took over. And you have yet to explain how Christianity destroyed Rome when it was economics, migration, and unending internal instability that made it so week. And all of this began before Christianity took over. Hell the first seeds of Rome’s demise began in the late republic, when soldiers became loyal to generals and not the state. The great economy that made the golden age of Rome possible was destroyed in the crisis of the third century, laying the foundations for feudalism. All of this coupled with the migrations of the Germanic and hunnic peoples is why the Rome fell NOT a change of faith.
if only the Byzantine and Sassanian Persian know what there true enemies was they would have been allies not enemy instead of fighting each other they should helped each other but the past is past anyway nice video 👍🏻👍🏻
They did Allie each other, but they were too weak and unstable so it was too late when they did eventually did it.
Is this the only thing people in the middle east ever talk about? Turks vs whoever, Jews vs whoever, Arabs vs whoever. Don't you people ever get tired of posting the same hatefull shit?
Rubz, Literally until the Turks arrived the Byzantines only fought Arabs in the Middle East.
Its Roman, byzantine is a made up term by 16th century historians
why would the muslims be the true enemies? lol also they did team up like bitches and got destroyed.
Good job! This channel is getting better and better!
Thank you Lion King!
Rome has had so many versions and I love each one. It's so good to see more interest in the "late" Roman period. Thank you for your time in doing these!
Long Live Mother Rome!
@Haris Manou Are you alright?
"Hey, how about wearing pants?" and everything changed
No one expects the FORCES OF THE CHAOS GODS
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
Skulls for the skull throne
@@FatKidAtRecess Milk for the Khorne flakes
Nobody expects *I, CATO SICARIUS!* And now take an Exterminatus.
@@thefirstprimariscatosicari6870 For Augustus !!! Ah shit wrong emprah...
6:11, Actually, Justin was the adoptive father of Justinian and in reality was his uncle.
True
A fantastic period for wargamers! And a beautiful video, well done!👍
6:54 "unless he was deemed unfit for service" the LOOK on the son!!! Duh!! Lol :)
Very good video, I don't understand why you don't have a enormous follower base by now
The content is fantastic and the info is accurate. The vocal recording could be slightly better though. Many times its clear that he ran out of steam in the middle of the sentence and then just spliced that with a different take. The result is a somewhat awkward cadence and inflections that make it difficult to listen to the audio without having to work to ignore those inflections. Not an attack and I'm not trying to tear down, just trying to help with some constructive criticism. Please don't splice audio in the middle of sentences.
Well done
I like how you use warhammer chaos symbol
the classic legionnaire look was always the best. the Byzantine or late Roman armour could never live up to the older styles in appearance but they were probably way more functional for the time
The earlier Lorica Segmentata was a much more advanced type of plate armor, but the late Empire did not have the productive capacity to equip it's soldiers with such armor.
Im in the opposite camp, prefer the late Roman period armor and arms
@@julianjohnson7908 Mail was definitely a less sophisticated form of armor when compared to plate armor, being an older technology that is not as resistant to blows.
@@rkitchen1967 That sounds a little bit armchairy to me. Mail and plate armor are both old techniques. Mail was used up until Augustus as the main type of armor and was never discontinued. There is some debate as to how many troops even had a Segmentata.
And Segmentata has a score of practical disadvantages - hard to maintain (oiling, scrubbing), hard/almost impossible to put on on your own, could become useless if damaged (bent plates chaffing against flesh, ouch!), harder to recycle.
Also segmentata didn't cover large parts of the body. You could easily expand mail armor by making it longer and adding sleeves.
Now mail has mostly advantages when it comes to practical use - super easy to put on, could be maintained and repaired by almost anyone, wouldn't rust if in constant use (constant friction between the rings removes rust), easy to recycle/refit.
It's main disadvantage is that it doesn't help you at all against brute force (which is why you would put padding underneath). But when it comes to slashing and low velocity stabbing attacks, that's where mail outperforms - because the rings will cluster together. With the level of metalurgy Romans had, the Lorica propably wouldn't be that hard to pierce if you put your mind to it. There wasn't a widespread use of crossbows, longbows and high velocity lance attacks at any rate - these forced the reinvention of plate armor in High middle ages
I like the roman republican uniforms
In my opinion as a Greek , Eastern Roman Empire lasted so long thanks not only to highly trained soldiers and brilliant battle tactics but also to the intelligence , education and leadership of the Eastern Roman emperors .
One of the most amazing things about why Rome was so successful, in my mind, is that they adapted their doctrines when it didn’t suit
From when they conquered Italy they and adopted the maniple system used by the Samnites to when Augustus reduced the number of legions and used natural borders to line the Roman Empire they adapted to the needs of the times they were in
As a student of the Eastern Roman Empire, may I be so rude as to claim that the Byzantine Army during Basil II (976-1025) actually was the equal to the formations of Imperial Rome and even the late army under Belisarius?
Unfortunately Basil's great efforts were nullified after his death thanks to several decades of weak Emperors/Empresses.
But even before his reign, Byzantium had produced several excellent Generals in a row like John Kourkouas, Nikephoros Phokas, and John Tzimiskes (the last two became Emperors aswell)
For those that are interested, I recommend reading the three volumes of "Byzantium" by John Julius Norwich.
P.S Many thanks for the upload, Im not ungrateful or so, I just feel that the Byzantine Empire deserves abit more attention than what it's given
Battle of Trajan gates and siege of Pernik 1016 BASIL II loses for the first time . against Bulgarians
Basil 2nd seems like a good emperor, what did his incompetent heirs do?
@@DonGius1 that's the problem. He didn't have any heirs except for the brother he kept in house arrest. A reverse Marcus Aurelius
Am I the only one who finds it a little ironically funny that the Romans abandoned the use of the Greek Hoplite Phalanx so long ago, only for the Late Roman infantry to be trained to fight in a very similar formation.
Different enemies require different formations.
I feel that first century Romans didn't face much calvary compared to the late Romans, and phalanx is very effective when facing such threats.
@@nenadmilovanovic5271
Yeah, they probably didn't face nearly as much proper heavy cavalry that could actually do a lot of harm to their legions, so a phalanx would've helped the late romans a lot more often than some people think.
Because even if you got a long lance, charging into several ranks of spears probably isn't going to be pretty.
@Marcelo Henrique Soares da Silva
I never said they did pal.
I was just commenting on the fact that they went from abandoning the phalanx to eventually using it again.
Cool video, I was unaware that the army was reorganized so soon after the Justinian plague.
i love the art style so much and . im a map nerd, but i always thought that rome at its hieght ruled dacia [in romania] and mesopatamia [in iraq] but the map didnt show this. i guess it must have been briefly held by rome
True I did not show the Roman empire at its height, as that lasted a short while with Trajan (especially the Mesopotamia bit), but it was very near that size for a very long time before and after Trajan. Should have shown full extent for a little bit. But Initially wanted to keep it more simple early in the video, even though I don't latter on. :)
@@EpimetheusHistory i thought so. great video anyway
Well, 160 years of control over Dacia and all the contacts with Roman provinces that had existed before that and that continued after the Aurelian administrative retreat of 271 AD... I don't know, you included so many provinces that correspond to non-Romance language speaking nations nowadays, it's a little unfair you didn't include Dacia
It bothered me so much that he made the West blue and the East red lol, I've always been accustomed to it being the other way around!
HORSE ARCHERS
@An Anatolian Guy *turkomans
*clicks on horse archer unit again*
I love how the drawn characters go from realistic to Asterix within the same picture and tone of presentation.
53 seconds you know
I think it's fair to say that when in the *right hands* the Byzantines were just as good or better than that of the Imperial legion.
Great video man!!!
Excellent Video. Won't you consider the reason for Roman decline and fall is due to Economic reasons ? for example devaluing their coinage .
They devaluiated their coinage because they lacked gold. They lacked gold because of cheap goods coming from India. In essence, the true reasons for their economic problems were:
(1)Plagues that killed much of the population.
(2)The inability to enforce protectionist policies against foreign goods from the east(Even when they banned the import of Indian goods, smugglers kept bringing them).
What's the name of the song from 5:15 ?
Nice video btw