Thank you so much for watching our videos! Each view helps a lot with the production process. You can support us even more by Becoming a UA-cam Member. Click on the Join Button for exclusive perks! Be the first to see videos, and parts of production and vote on topics : ua-cam.com/channels/uCuEKq1xuRA0dFQj1qg9-Q.htmljoin You can also support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/Knowledgia . Thank you so much for watching, your constant support and consideration! Cheers!
Byzantium was not extention of the Western Roman Empire. WTH are you talking about ? Byzantium Was the Eastern Roman Empire and actually the more important part of the whole roman Empire. This is why its survived. So change that in the video. Byzantium WAS THE EASTERN PART OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE and EXTENSION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.NOT EXTENSION OF THE WESTERN ROMAN EMPIRE. ALso THE WESTERN ROMAN EMPIRE WAS WEAKER THAN THE EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE and this is why it fell. So once again: Byzantium was THE EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE. NOT EXTENSION OF THE WESTERN ROMAN EMPIRE. The Western Roman Empire was the Western Part of the Roman Empire while Byzantium was the Eastern Part. So Byzantium WAs technically what remained of the ROman Empire after the Western Part fell. Byzantium was the Rooman Empire.
In fact the Roman Republic itself was never formally abolished. The Byzantine Empire was thus sometimes called the “Roman Republic.” See more by Anthony Kaldellis
In the Bronze Age people also traded stuff that ended far away - to call it a relation is a bit meh - and due to time to travel and to many variables - formal diplomatic relations would almost always be useless.
@@MatthewTheWanderer I would just call it trade with Chinese stuff - or “the Silk Road” - even though I have plenty of Chinese stuff - I don’t really talk much about have a relationship with the Chinese - nor do other people. So it’s not really about being the wrong word - it just not very relevant.
I'd suggest reading through Raoul McLoughlin's book, "The Roman Empire and the Indian Ocean: The Ancient World Economy and the Kingdoms of Africa, Arabia, and India." He makes the case that in the period 0-200 CE, trade tax revenues on the seaborne trade from Egypt to Arabia, east Africa, and India were 50% of Imperial revenue.
Guess when you effectively control the entire coastline of the Eastern Mediterranean, the Isthmus of Suez, and the Nile Delta, most people don't have much of a choice but to go through you
@@MatthewTheWanderer I only replied to you saying Southeastern Europe, which they obviously didn't have, I don't know where you're taking Egypt from. In the Vth century countries in Southeastern Europe were Hunnia, Onoguria, Oguria, Saraguria, Utiguria, Bersilia, Alania, Bulgaria, Abasgia, Zichia, Iberia, Albania, Iran, among others.
By the way the origins of the Bubonic plague is still disputed but more evidence recently is pointing to the origins being in Central Asia around modern day Kyrgyzstan, with then China and the Silk Road spreading the disease which is also what caused confusion about the origins of the plague.
@@Knowledgia Thanks. I recently ordered a book coming in the mail. “Lost to the west “ the forgotten Byzantine Empire that Rescued western civilization by Lars Brown worth. It’s a start since only middle school and High school only in my day only thought Rome from Republic to the down fall of the west Roman Empire.
@user-mm7zi4ue7d Not sure what you mean, that Rome was founded by Turkey, it does not make any sense. Turkey is the nation founded by Ataturk last century.
@@georgebettasso1395 Watch out for Anthony Kaldellis' new book about the Byzantine Empire- The New Roman Empire. You have 1000 pages of Eastern Roman history from beginning to end.
8:41 wonder if this price hike forced by Justinian was part of the legend behind Tyrian Purple dye aka royal purple so expensive only royals could have it
Always want to know more about Persia and China and what became Russia and the Vikings and celts and Germanic tribes etcetera. And some history books/teachers/classes teach that Persia being hostile lead to the northern/russian routes but Russia wasn’t yet Russia or unified til the 1500s when Muscovy gained power so there were too many tribes/middle men and then in Mediterranean trade you had Persia Egypt greeece and Rome and later Venice in the way, and the routes around South America and Africa once found were too hostile weather wise and between those hostile weather routes and the long undefendable Silk Road routes it lead to all the voyages to find America when they actually wanted to find a direct route from England Spain Portugal Ireland and France direct to China to try to bypass all the middle men/merchants. In some ways it will be interesting as the world warms to find out the truth about the artic trade routes that Russia China and some others insist were not legend but fact. I tend to believe it is a lost 3rd global trade route I mean the Irish and Vikings went all the way to North America the Polynesians went all the way to North America speculation is ancient China made it to at least South America possibly also North America as well the Russians in Siberia and Inuit in Alaska and Canada seem tied to each other and to the Vikings and apparently Russia comes from the Viking tribe the rus or River people/river raiders, and Russia seems to have been first settled from the north and from the northern rivers and from Scandinavia. Russia always said during the Cold War it developed ice breaker ships to re open old historical routes from Russia to Japan Korea and China along the arctic coastline if Vikings went one way towards North America it stands to reason they would have also went the other way across Russia. To this day no one knows where the scandanavians and Germanic tribes came/originated from, the oldest records indicate from what is now Denmark and Norway and “points north” implying strongly that Germanic peoples did not originate in Scandinavia either but somewhere north or from the ocean/sea. To this day no one knows where the Philistines or the Phoenicians or the other “sea peoples” of the Bible or the Atlanteans went. Ireland seems to show evidence of global trade back to the time of King Arthur or even prior to that. Roman jars are found off south americas Atlantic coastline in vast quantities. History is written by the winners and that has historically been China Persia Greece Rome and England. It would be interesting to find out Northern European history back to ancient/pre Roman times. Even finding out more about Greek Persian and Chinese history would be great and could lead to more knowledge of Siberia history and Russia history eventually. I read that apparently Greek advisors helped Chinese workers construct the first emperors terra cotta army. Biblical era history seems to imply a much stronger link between Persia China and Greece then western history talks about, most western history presumes the Greeks and Roman’s only knew about the part of persia closest to them and nothing about China and that Alexander discovered India by total utter surprise and had to turn back and come home because of the war elephants used by India but biblical and middle eastern history seems to indicate that Greece had a kingdom right at the intersection of Persia and China in what is now Central Asia and the Stans countries and it was Greco bactrian or Scythian or something and was there for generations as the Greeks and Persians and Chinese all traded and fought one another and lasted until the Turks/mongols pushed them out of the area or something while the Persians and Chinese survived and are still there bordering each other and India. Russian and Byzantine history seems to indicate that Moscow truly was the third Rome after Persia and the Arabs ottomans and Turks were on the verge of sacking the Byzantine/true Roman Empire. But yet we never learn about that in history I learned more from one of the tomb raider games and looking things up online afterwards then I ever did from history classes or books. Apparently Jewish/hebrew/israelite culture actually extended all the way into Russia and all the way into Ethiopia in historical times but we never get to learn that either. Everyone acts like France Spain England are the big cheeses and only things worth learning about in history classes. But I’m much more interested in more ancient history like Russia Persia and China, like how Russia is supposedly a new country but there is evidence of ties between Russia and England back to before either was a country back to like pre Ivan the terrible or pre King Arthur times. Like Russia England France Germany and Scandinavia nations all seem to have basically the same culture/cultural ties or been part of some other trade network or historical grouping or affiliation, but somehow Rome failing to conquer Germania and succeeding to conquer England and France split the group and made England forget part of its own history and take the Roman or Italian or Mediterranean centric view of the world and world history and. Events and the Roman view and Greek view of Germany as barbarians I’ve also been interested in why so many stone monuments around the world seem to date to or have an astronomical alignment related to about 10000 bc or 12,000 years ago just 500 to 1,000 years after scientists say the last ice age came to a close. Almost as if a global society or trading network or cultural exchange existed back then that was then lost and forgotten about somehow. Also much of western culture seems to have been brought in to Greece and Rome by trade from Persia and Arabia and Russia or the Turks Mongols and other invading tribes from Manchuria/mongolia that invaded via the Russia steppes into continental Europe But German or north European culture seems separate sourced it didn’t come from either the steppes or the Mediterranean or middle eastern or African influences or cultures it originated in Scandinavia and Denmark but their own records legends and oral histories state the are not native to Norway and came from points north or still further north or from the sea potentially. The only land I’m aware of on a map north of Norway is Svalbard, the land that was designated neutral/united nations land/territory during the Cold War often times and where to this day no one owns it and no one cared to claim it til Britain Norway and Russia all did after risk added it to the risk game board in the 1990s when Risk II came out for windows pcs. Then when I was in college I believe the seed vault in case us and Russia destroyed the world with nuclear weaponry was placed there or was going to be if I recall correctly. It makes me wonder if Svalbard could have been the origin of Germany England France and Russia and the Scandinavian countries. If not Svalbard if you keep going north over the pole you end up in Russia. It would be hilarious if Russia proved to be the origin for Scandinavia Denmark and Germany and France and England and then later the Vikings founded modern Russia going back to what might have been their original homeland. It would be even more interesting if the mongols Turks and Manchu had driven out the what became the Vikings and Germanic tribes and that their later invasions of europe were trying to discover where they went when they left since they hadn’t returned. Also I thought celts came from. France and Germany but in one of my college classes there was evidence strongly suggesting the celts were in what is now turkey before they were in Europe and that they may just be yet another in the long line of Eurasian steppe tribes invading from the east like the mongols and Turks had.
In a weird way, China is like if the Roman’s never fell. I mean the current size of China is larger than the Han Dynasty. While there have been civil wars, the size of China has more or less been preserved throughout history which is fairly impressive as of course that is a long time.
That's what's fascinating about China. Chinese civilization has never ended. It is has a continuous history stretching over 3500 years. The various successor dynasties and even after the ending of imperial rule, the brief republic and communism all are just 'new management' for China. Even when invaded by 'barbarians' like Yuan or Manchus, the foreign rulers never did away with Chinese political ideas, bureaucracy, administration, it's civil service, organized taxation system, classical literature and cultural arts because Chinese socio-political theories and institutions functioned so well to keep such a vast country with a vast population together. This is contrast to Rome where 'barbarians' never bothered to truly learn and assimilate Roman culture and maintain Roman institutions and technologies. My guess is that Rome never truly developed a efficient bureaucracy and civil service for the invaders to make use of. And if the invaders didn't respect and adopt the foundational principles of any well run country the other things associated with that country, it's culture, like arts, literature and general way of life would too be abandoned. But given all of that China had the advantage of having a ethnically and culturally 'homogenous' people to work with. Although there were linguistic and regional differences the Chinese invested heavily in its civil service on both a central governmental level and local level so it made even far off regions feel like they had a stake in the empire and that local voices and concerns would be taken into consideration within the central government (i.e. tailoring the tax rate to meet local output or circumstance and promoting a limited form of state education so that even local children could grow up to work in the government). Also geographically China is fairly isolated. The only major civilization that china 'had too' but never competed with (in territorial and militaristic terms) was India. But the two were separated by a huge mountain range which acted as a natural wall between the two civilizations which meant that they left each other alone, with the exception to trade (particularly the incense trade) and cultural exchange, the spread of Buddhism into China starting in the third century CE being a notable example. To the north were the Steepes and sub-artic Siberia were only the Mongols lived along with other various tribes like the Xiongnu which harassed China's northern border but those peoples rarely had expansionist ambitions because they were too few in number with all living at a near subsistence level in the cold north, had a preference for a nomadic lifestyle which meant they didn't feel the need to invade because conquest meant converting to a sedentary lifestyle and prior to the twelfth century CE they were scattered tribes fighting amongst themselves and not a united people that could pose a threat to China. And the west was again blocked off by mountains and any significant invading army had march thousands of miles across near desert like terrain through the Tarim basin and the Hexi corridor before reaching China proper. Rome had a bigger task because it conquered various peoples, with differing cultures and religions. The fact it was able to last for a good couple of centuries is in and of itself an achievement. Also Rome was surrounded on two fronts with no major geographical features acting as natural barriers against peoples invading across its Rhine-Danubian river borders and it's near open borders to the east when facing against the Sassanids.
3500 years of Chinese history according to PRC. Only anti-Chinese organizations say 3500 years of Chinese civilization. Huaxia officially and fatally ended when Ming fell. Zhonghua popped up afterwards
@@MarcusCato275 China sinicized the conquered peoples, it didn't have it easy. The peoples in the north were other Sinitics and Austronesians, those in the south were Kra-dai, Hmong-mien, Austroasiatics, Tibetanics etc. Rome had many natural barriers lmao, it's just that you don't know geography. In the east the Euphrates, the Syrian and Nafud Deserts, in the north, behind the Rhine-Danube, it had the Drava, Sava, Inn, the Alpes, the Balkans, the Dinarics, the Po, Meuse, Moselle, Saône, Seine, Yonne, Marne, Loire, Allier, Rhône, the Massif Central etc.
@@genovayork2468 To an extent what you say is true but the difference being with China and the various 'Sinitic' peoples surrounding it is that China or the central Chinese government never had a policy of directly going out and assimilating those peoples and cultures. The Chinese did launch campaigns against nomadic raiders but they were retaliatory and served to act as a deterance rather than acts of conquest. In fact is was the non-chinese peoples surrounding China that themselves took a active role in adopting and assimilating to Chinese culture as part of the imperial Chinese tribute system, offering gifts and regular tribute to the emperor and the emperor giving trading rights and concessions - though this was not seen by the Chinese as a equal diplomatic exchange rather an act of a benevolent ruler towards to a respectful but ultimately poor and unfortunate subordinate. And in turn various regions gradually came into the Chinese cultural and political sphere. The Chinese effectively applied ancient Rome's patron-client system in their foreign policy with the exception that their vassals where keen to learn and assimilate Chinese culture and benefit from access to Chinese goods and China seeing no need to interfere with their local politics. The major conquests China did were on its own people living in China proper during the warring states period under its first emperor Qin Shi Huang Di but I never viewed that as 'conquest' or evidence of Chinese military imperialism and the peoples 'conquered' were Chinese and not foreigners. I view that as an act of unification rather than conquering foreign peoples much in the same way as ancient Greek city states warred amongst themselves and when Phillip of Macedon invaded southern Greece to unify the Hellenic peoples. I personally never believed Athens, Thebes, Corinth, Sparta etc. were foreigners to the Macedonians, they we're all Greeks speaking one language, using one writing system, sharing the same god's etc. the same is with China during her warring stars period, three kingdoms period etc. Chinese imperialism differed from Rome. China favoured cultural imperialism i.e. an extreme form of 'soft power' displaying how well organized and prosperous your country is to others that they will want to develop closer ties to you in order to share in your prosperity - a political realization of Mencius work and to a lesser extent the Shang Shu or book of documents a religious/political chronicle come treatise which laid the foundation of Chinese political thought. Rome favoured militaristic and political interference strategies when dealing with foreign peoples, invade and conquer (usually using the reasoning of self defense to justify preemptive strikes), individual politicians going on campaigns of conquest to garner political support back in Rome, establishing client states and installing or supporting cooperative puppet rulers. And their national mythology, the death and apparent ascension of Romulus whose last command to the people of Rome was to go and conquer the world is testament to the Roman imperialistic character. I'm not as familiar with European geography as you are but the rivers and deserts you mentioned fundamentally aren't as formidable as huge mountain ranges or frozen wastes or long stretches of near desert like routes as China had. Throughout Roman history various tribes successfully invaded into and near to Roman territory and that had impacted Roman history such as Marian reforms which was used to recruit as many jobless plebeians to deal with an invasion in Gaul, or Caesar's campaigns in Gaul where he dealt with multiple invasion from Germanic tribes using the incursion as a pretext to conquer all of Gaul in order to 'protect' the gallic client kings of Rome. Towards the end of the empire the Rhine and various river crossings froze over to allow hundreds of thousands of Germanic and gothic people to invade the western part of the Roman empire. Rivers are useful barriers but they're not insurmountable whether with organized boat crossings, bridge building or the rivers themselves freezing over. Deserts though Inhospitable are fundamentally open terrain and an army with proper provisions can cross over especially if water sources are not faroff as in the case of the parts of tigris and Euphrates running near the Syrian border. The Sassanids throughout their history launched various forays into eastern Roman territory but were never successful not owing to geography but mainly due to internal political intrigues which hampered campaigns or quick or the eventual Roman response to expel the Sassanids.
The silk road was born because of the Greco Bactrians/Indo greeks and china in ancient times. Greeks and Chinese/Indians is already have significant relationship since in ancient times....
China thought Rome had it's own silk industry, because the cloth coming from the west was better quality, when in fact it was Chinese silk, in a very raw state, being respun. Things just don't change, why use QC on goods for the gwai-lo?
Best history channel there is .. but my guys could make series about Greece like you did for Rome .. from begging to end (i know Rome is still running) .. like from Minoans, Mycenaeans to Spartans and Greco-Persian wars to AlexanderTheGreat .. War Of Diadochi and finally conquest of Rome and and of Hellenic era 😊😅
New to this channel. As I looked through the videos I realize there’s an obsession with the Ottoman Empire but no videos on Assyrians , Armenians, Greeks, Kurds!
The first reason is that the stories of those peoples are not nearly as interesting, epic, well-documented, and consequential as the Ottoman and Roman empire's. The second reason is that, well, the channel has garnered an audience with a peculiar love for Byzantine/Ottoman history.
@@Samuil-iq6eb I watched it till the end, and heard something about the Eastern Romans being an extension of Western Rome. Well… My point about the Go-Turks still stands, tho.
Which current country is closest to the core of Byzantine? I assume Greece?. Also is it why it’s arch enemy is still Turkey whom their predecessors Ottoman and Seljuk’s toppled the Byzantine?.
Yes, and the capital of Greeks( Romei) was the Constantinople for 1000 years, and not Athens. Greeks in Byzantine era/medieval times but also till modern times called themselves "Romei (Romans)".
I really hate the term Byzantium. There are times stating it right. Romans as they saw themselves as Roman. Also, they had silk production in Rome, but what happened to it is lost. It isn't sure that if Chinese silk originally just was so much cheaper due to production rates that they stopped making their own which after the Chinese raised the prices rather gradually throughout time. It is like stated which was the trade was going on long before the west fell. The Eastern Roman Empire was very much Roman. It didn't lose its Roman status due to the city of Rome being lost. Both the West and East moved away from Rome for different reasons. It just is a bit annoying talking about Rome in the East as if they are not Roman in one sentence, but the next call it something it was never called.
ancient china alwis have internal war and and war with the outer tribes, when they need to raise funds for military they tax more , hence the items become more expensives, applied to merchants as well.
It's sad to think just how mankind would have evolved if not for the fall of both THE EASTERN & WESTERN ROMAN EMPIRES. THE FALL OF THESE GREAT EMPIRES LIKE GREECE AND ROME ARE SOME OF HISTORYS GREATEST TRAGEDIES. THE LOST KNOWLEDGE ALONE IS TERRIFIC.
@@genovayork2468 Bronze age Greece, Ancient Greece, Byzantium/Byzantine Empire = Medieval Greece, Modern Greece. The words "Greeks, Greece" exists for about 2800 years, since the first contact between Greeks and Latins in Italian peninsula around 800-700 BC.
It was an Empire. Trade was its strong point but it wasn't its sole source of income like say the later trade republics. In fact, a major portion of its revenues simply came from land taxes.
@zippyparakeet1074 Sure, but we're talking political economy - the economic system. Land revenue is basically feudalism. At sea, the trade republics were still legally considered as subjects by the Christian emperors at least until 1204, and even later depending on the emperor. The question still stands. Beyond feudalism, can Byzantium's economic system be considered as basically mercantilism?
@@zippyparakeet1074 You have no idea on what planet you are. 1. You don't even know the difference between mercantilist and mercantile lmfao.😂😂 2. Not all the income of the so called trade republics came from trade.
@@AlexFeldman-of4rq Land revenue is feudalism??? What??? Do you know what feudalism means? The Byzantine administrative and economic system was literally the furthest thing from Feudalism. The small time farmers owned their lands unlike Western Europe where the nobility held large estates. The Byzantines simply made a buttload of money from taxes because they had a well preserved, well oiled, bureaucratic and administrative system that they inherited from the old Roman Empire. Its merchant class was very strong and it definitely made a huge amount of money from trade but it was not the main source of the Empire's income. Yes, they made that much money.
The Byzantine empire was not Roman. It's usually Roman fanboys who like to think that is. It was basically a Greek kingdom. Greeks who inherited the eastern half of the Roman empire.
There isn't a "Byzantine Empire" only Roman Empire, even the people living in it called it the Roman Empire, Rome never fell only the Western half did, or you can say they lost the western half to the Germanic tribes.
Western Wei was founded in 534, Northern Qi in 550 and Southern Chen in 557, your map is wrong like holy. Your silk route map is also very wrong. There were no Russians then. You failed to do basic research.
It's a distinction later made by people outside the empire since it no longer controlled Rome. Plus other states ( like the HRE among others) claimed to be the true successors of Rome.
@@genovayork2468 " wasn't a state" I'm fully aware that it was a disunited mess . When I said state I never implied that it was as coherent as our modern idea of one bit apparently being pedantic is in fashion.
gotta move on from the term Byzantine. Once the western Roman half of the empire collapsed...the eastern half became the sole ROMAN EMPIRE until 1453. The Holy Roman Empire was a pretender state. Period
Actually the western Roman empire was the extension of eastern Roman empire.Just take a look at Julian.He became emperor in west but when his uncle died and united the empire he ruled in Constantinople.I don't get why you people dend to confuse it,the empire's capital after Constantine is Constantinople,even after the last administrative division the capital of both empires is in Constantinople,Ravenna is just the seat of the western emperor and Rome is the prestigious monument of this creation and seat of the western Senate,because obviously Ravenna hadn't the structures of Rome to house the offices of the senate and its body also,in contrast to Rome that was the previous capital and Constantinople that was the later capital,and as the Pope said many many years ago,"when the two Romes were united,ruled the worled" he didn't say three including Ravenna.So there are two capitals Rome the previous and Constantinople the later and the Eastern Empire is now the center,so the west is the extension.
@@genovayork2468 Never said its not correct. It's just funny having a map that sais Western Roman Emoire and Byzantine Empire. Because the map should include the Eastern part of the Empire as well no?
@@genovayork2468 plus it could be offensive to the memory of the Eastern Roman Empire as the whole idea that the Eastern Roman Empire wasn't Roman was force by the Pope later on because of the split of the churches and because The Eastern Roman Empire Keverne recognised the Holy Roman Empire as a Roman Empire.
@@mrawesome1688 You said its name isn't Byzantium, that means you said it's incorrect, weak on the brain. I don't care if it's offensive, I care if it's correct, and it is.
@@genovayork2468 well that is true no one back then call it Byzantium. Everyone call it it Eastern Roman Empire. Maybe your mind is weak for not caring. That just shows lack of interest and that maybe you shouldn't have an opinion in matters you lack interest.
@@dantetreRomolus Augustulus is Usurper put in the position by his Traitor Father Orestes Also under the Roman Imperial Law a Western Emperor Counter-Part must be Recognized by its Senior Eastern Counterpart in Constantinople.
Thank you so much for watching our videos! Each view helps a lot with the production process. You can support us even more by Becoming a UA-cam Member. Click on the Join Button for exclusive perks! Be the first to see videos, and parts of production and vote on topics : ua-cam.com/channels/uCuEKq1xuRA0dFQj1qg9-Q.htmljoin
You can also support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/Knowledgia .
Thank you so much for watching, your constant support and consideration! Cheers!
Byzantium was not extention of the Western Roman Empire. WTH are you talking about ? Byzantium Was the Eastern Roman Empire and actually the more important part of the whole roman Empire. This is why its survived.
So change that in the video. Byzantium WAS THE EASTERN PART OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE and EXTENSION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.NOT EXTENSION OF THE WESTERN ROMAN EMPIRE.
ALso THE WESTERN ROMAN EMPIRE WAS WEAKER THAN THE EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE and this is why it fell.
So once again: Byzantium was THE EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE. NOT EXTENSION OF THE WESTERN ROMAN EMPIRE. The Western Roman Empire was the Western Part of the Roman Empire while Byzantium was the Eastern Part.
So Byzantium WAs technically what remained of the ROman Empire after the Western Part fell. Byzantium was the Rooman Empire.
A great n informative video this is
@@robotube7361 First of all. Who cares? It's not like it's something that would make you dumb.
Good Video!
Battle of Dumatul Jandal
The Eastern Roman Empire was NOT an extension of the Western Roman Empire, it was the continuation of the Roman Empire.
Hieronymus Wolf fault.
@@Steven-dt5nu It literally has nothing to do with him, are you numb?
In fact the Roman Republic itself was never formally abolished. The Byzantine Empire was thus sometimes called the “Roman Republic.” See more by Anthony Kaldellis
@@mint8648 His book is Greek propaganda.
Well in a way extension can also mean continuation based on context. Lol
Roman-Chinese relations is one of the most fascinating and overlooked topics in ancient history to me!
yep it is
No, they are overrated.
In the Bronze Age people also traded stuff that ended far away - to call it a relation is a bit meh - and due to time to travel and to many variables - formal diplomatic relations would almost always be useless.
@@71kimg What other word would you use besides "relations" even from a distance and with middlemen in the way?
@@MatthewTheWanderer I would just call it trade with Chinese stuff - or “the Silk Road” - even though I have plenty of Chinese stuff - I don’t really talk much about have a relationship with the Chinese - nor do other people. So it’s not really about being the wrong word - it just not very relevant.
I'd suggest reading through Raoul McLoughlin's book, "The Roman Empire and the Indian Ocean: The Ancient World Economy and the Kingdoms of Africa, Arabia, and India." He makes the case that in the period 0-200 CE, trade tax revenues on the seaborne trade from Egypt to Arabia, east Africa, and India were 50% of Imperial revenue.
Guess when you effectively control the entire coastline of the Eastern Mediterranean, the Isthmus of Suez, and the Nile Delta, most people don't have much of a choice but to go through you
Nah, going through Southeastern Europe rules.
@@genovayork2468 They controlled that, too, lol.
@@MatthewTheWanderer They didn't, "lol" guy.
@@genovayork2468 The Byzantines didn't control Southeastern Europe and Egypt? Is that what you're saying?
@@MatthewTheWanderer I only replied to you saying Southeastern Europe, which they obviously didn't have, I don't know where you're taking Egypt from. In the Vth century countries in Southeastern Europe were Hunnia, Onoguria, Oguria, Saraguria, Utiguria, Bersilia, Alania, Bulgaria, Abasgia, Zichia, Iberia, Albania, Iran, among others.
Woot woot Eastern Romans!!! I was here!
U was in eastern Rome? Damn y’all ain’t even invite me come on
Leastern Romans
What were you doing in the ERE?
I am from Greece and one of the most popular last names here is Metaxas which means: "trader of silk"
That's very interesting!
@@KnowledgiaI heard Greece is the word😂
@@Knowledgia Metaxas was also the Prime Minister when Greece entered World War 2 along with the allies.
Dictator not prime minioster@@tomsmith4542
It's also the Metaxa drink. They were silk merchants up to 19th century
Love your content.Keep up the good work!🇬🇷
By the way the origins of the Bubonic plague is still disputed but more evidence recently is pointing to the origins being in Central Asia around modern day Kyrgyzstan, with then China and the Silk Road spreading the disease which is also what caused confusion about the origins of the plague.
In Age of Empires as the Byzantines I usually just make a bunch of trade carts and protect them with Cataphracts
Impero?
Presto
Awesome info I don’t know much about the Byzantine Empire. Only the Roman republic and Roman Empire. Haven’t got into much about Eastern Roman Empire.
More videos about the byzantines are planned 📖
@@Knowledgia Thanks. I recently ordered a book coming in the mail. “Lost to the west “ the forgotten Byzantine Empire that Rescued western civilization by Lars Brown worth. It’s a start since only middle school and High school only in my day only thought Rome from Republic to the down fall of the west Roman Empire.
@user-mm7zi4ue7d Not sure what you mean, that Rome was founded by Turkey, it does not make any sense. Turkey is the nation founded by Ataturk last century.
@@ionutpaun9828 Buying books when you can learn infinitely more for free: 🤡
@@georgebettasso1395 Watch out for Anthony Kaldellis' new book about the Byzantine Empire- The New Roman Empire. You have 1000 pages of Eastern Roman history from beginning to end.
8:41 wonder if this price hike forced by Justinian was part of the legend behind Tyrian Purple dye aka royal purple so expensive only royals could have it
The guy on your thumbnail looks like a Byzantine Henry Cavill!
Always want to know more about Persia and China and what became Russia and the Vikings and celts and Germanic tribes etcetera. And some history books/teachers/classes teach that Persia being hostile lead to the northern/russian routes but Russia wasn’t yet Russia or unified til the 1500s when Muscovy gained power so there were too many tribes/middle men and then in Mediterranean trade you had Persia Egypt greeece and Rome and later Venice in the way, and the routes around South America and Africa once found were too hostile weather wise and between those hostile weather routes and the long undefendable Silk Road routes it lead to all the voyages to find America when they actually wanted to find a direct route from England Spain Portugal Ireland and France direct to China to try to bypass all the middle men/merchants.
In some ways it will be interesting as the world warms to find out the truth about the artic trade routes that Russia China and some others insist were not legend but fact.
I tend to believe it is a lost 3rd global trade route I mean the Irish and Vikings went all the way to North America the Polynesians went all the way to North America speculation is ancient China made it to at least South America possibly also North America as well the Russians in Siberia and Inuit in Alaska and Canada seem tied to each other and to the Vikings and apparently Russia comes from the Viking tribe the rus or River people/river raiders, and Russia seems to have been first settled from the north and from the northern rivers and from Scandinavia. Russia always said during the Cold War it developed ice breaker ships to re open old historical routes from Russia to Japan Korea and China along the arctic coastline if Vikings went one way towards North America it stands to reason they would have also went the other way across Russia.
To this day no one knows where the scandanavians and Germanic tribes came/originated from, the oldest records indicate from what is now Denmark and Norway and “points north” implying strongly that Germanic peoples did not originate in Scandinavia either but somewhere north or from the ocean/sea. To this day no one knows where the Philistines or the Phoenicians or the other “sea peoples” of the Bible or the Atlanteans went.
Ireland seems to show evidence of global trade back to the time of King Arthur or even prior to that. Roman jars are found off south americas Atlantic coastline in vast quantities.
History is written by the winners and that has historically been China Persia Greece Rome and England. It would be interesting to find out Northern European history back to ancient/pre Roman times.
Even finding out more about Greek Persian and Chinese history would be great and could lead to more knowledge of Siberia history and Russia history eventually.
I read that apparently Greek advisors helped Chinese workers construct the first emperors terra cotta army. Biblical era history seems to imply a much stronger link between Persia China and Greece then western history talks about, most western history presumes the Greeks and Roman’s only knew about the part of persia closest to them and nothing about China and that Alexander discovered India by total utter surprise and had to turn back and come home because of the war elephants used by India but biblical and middle eastern history seems to indicate that Greece had a kingdom right at the intersection of Persia and China in what is now Central Asia and the Stans countries and it was Greco bactrian or Scythian or something and was there for generations as the Greeks and Persians and Chinese all traded and fought one another and lasted until the Turks/mongols pushed them out of the area or something while the Persians and Chinese survived and are still there bordering each other and India.
Russian and Byzantine history seems to indicate that Moscow truly was the third Rome after Persia and the Arabs ottomans and Turks were on the verge of sacking the Byzantine/true Roman Empire. But yet we never learn about that in history I learned more from one of the tomb raider games and looking things up online afterwards then I ever did from history classes or books.
Apparently Jewish/hebrew/israelite culture actually extended all the way into Russia and all the way into Ethiopia in historical times but we never get to learn that either. Everyone acts like France Spain England are the big cheeses and only things worth learning about in history classes. But I’m much more interested in more ancient history like Russia Persia and China, like how Russia is supposedly a new country but there is evidence of ties between Russia and England back to before either was a country back to like pre Ivan the terrible or pre King Arthur times.
Like Russia England France Germany and Scandinavia nations all seem to have basically the same culture/cultural ties or been part of some other trade network or historical grouping or affiliation, but somehow Rome failing to conquer Germania and succeeding to conquer England and France split the group and made England forget part of its own history and take the Roman or Italian or Mediterranean centric view of the world and world history and. Events and the Roman view and Greek view of Germany as barbarians
I’ve also been interested in why so many stone monuments around the world seem to date to or have an astronomical alignment related to about 10000 bc or 12,000 years ago just 500 to 1,000 years after scientists say the last ice age came to a close. Almost as if a global society or trading network or cultural exchange existed back then that was then lost and forgotten about somehow.
Also much of western culture seems to have been brought in to Greece and Rome by trade from Persia and Arabia and Russia or the Turks Mongols and other invading tribes from Manchuria/mongolia that invaded via the Russia steppes into continental Europe
But German or north European culture seems separate sourced it didn’t come from either the steppes or the Mediterranean or middle eastern or African influences or cultures it originated in Scandinavia and Denmark but their own records legends and oral histories state the are not native to Norway and came from points north or still further north or from the sea potentially.
The only land I’m aware of on a map north of Norway is Svalbard, the land that was designated neutral/united nations land/territory during the Cold War often times and where to this day no one owns it and no one cared to claim it til Britain Norway and Russia all did after risk added it to the risk game board in the 1990s when Risk II came out for windows pcs. Then when I was in college I believe the seed vault in case us and Russia destroyed the world with nuclear weaponry was placed there or was going to be if I recall correctly.
It makes me wonder if Svalbard could have been the origin of Germany England France and Russia and the Scandinavian countries.
If not Svalbard if you keep going north over the pole you end up in Russia. It would be hilarious if Russia proved to be the origin for Scandinavia Denmark and Germany and France and England and then later the Vikings founded modern Russia going back to what might have been their original homeland. It would be even more interesting if the mongols Turks and Manchu had driven out the what became the Vikings and Germanic tribes and that their later invasions of europe were trying to discover where they went when they left since they hadn’t returned.
Also I thought celts came from. France and Germany but in one of my college classes there was evidence strongly suggesting the celts were in what is now turkey before they were in Europe and that they may just be yet another in the long line of Eurasian steppe tribes invading from the east like the mongols and Turks had.
Very good
interesting video, not a topic I ever thought of much
Is good for learning history ❤
No.
In a weird way, China is like if the Roman’s never fell. I mean the current size of China is larger than the Han Dynasty. While there have been civil wars, the size of China has more or less been preserved throughout history which is fairly impressive as of course that is a long time.
That's what's fascinating about China.
Chinese civilization has never ended. It is has a continuous history stretching over 3500 years.
The various successor dynasties and even after the ending of imperial rule, the brief republic and communism all are just 'new management' for China.
Even when invaded by 'barbarians' like Yuan or Manchus, the foreign rulers never did away with Chinese political ideas, bureaucracy, administration, it's civil service, organized taxation system, classical literature and cultural arts because Chinese socio-political theories and institutions functioned so well to keep such a vast country with a vast population together.
This is contrast to Rome where 'barbarians' never bothered to truly learn and assimilate Roman culture and maintain Roman institutions and technologies.
My guess is that Rome never truly developed a efficient bureaucracy and civil service for the invaders to make use of. And if the invaders didn't respect and adopt the foundational principles of any well run country the other things associated with that country, it's culture, like arts, literature and general way of life would too be abandoned.
But given all of that China had the advantage of having a ethnically and culturally 'homogenous' people to work with. Although there were linguistic and regional differences the Chinese invested heavily in its civil service on both a central governmental level and local level so it made even far off regions feel like they had a stake in the empire and that local voices and concerns would be taken into consideration within the central government (i.e. tailoring the tax rate to meet local output or circumstance and promoting a limited form of state education so that even local children could grow up to work in the government). Also geographically China is fairly isolated. The only major civilization that china 'had too' but never competed with (in territorial and militaristic terms) was India. But the two were separated by a huge mountain range which acted as a natural wall between the two civilizations which meant that they left each other alone, with the exception to trade (particularly the incense trade) and cultural exchange, the spread of Buddhism into China starting in the third century CE being a notable example. To the north were the Steepes and sub-artic Siberia were only the Mongols lived along with other various tribes like the Xiongnu which harassed China's northern border but those peoples rarely had expansionist ambitions because they were too few in number with all living at a near subsistence level in the cold north, had a preference for a nomadic lifestyle which meant they didn't feel the need to invade because conquest meant converting to a sedentary lifestyle and prior to the twelfth century CE they were scattered tribes fighting amongst themselves and not a united people that could pose a threat to China. And the west was again blocked off by mountains and any significant invading army had march thousands of miles across near desert like terrain through the Tarim basin and the Hexi corridor before reaching China proper.
Rome had a bigger task because it conquered various peoples, with differing cultures and religions. The fact it was able to last for a good couple of centuries is in and of itself an achievement. Also Rome was surrounded on two fronts with no major geographical features acting as natural barriers against peoples invading across its Rhine-Danubian river borders and it's near open borders to the east when facing against the Sassanids.
the difference is that Rome went from a republic to an empire while China went from an empire to a republic.
3500 years of Chinese history according to PRC. Only anti-Chinese organizations say 3500 years of Chinese civilization. Huaxia officially and fatally ended when Ming fell. Zhonghua popped up afterwards
@@MarcusCato275 China sinicized the conquered peoples, it didn't have it easy. The peoples in the north were other Sinitics and Austronesians, those in the south were Kra-dai, Hmong-mien, Austroasiatics, Tibetanics etc.
Rome had many natural barriers lmao, it's just that you don't know geography. In the east the Euphrates, the Syrian and Nafud Deserts, in the north, behind the Rhine-Danube, it had the Drava, Sava, Inn, the Alpes, the Balkans, the Dinarics, the Po, Meuse, Moselle, Saône, Seine, Yonne, Marne, Loire, Allier, Rhône, the Massif Central etc.
@@genovayork2468 To an extent what you say is true but the difference being with China and the various 'Sinitic' peoples surrounding it is that China or the central Chinese government never had a policy of directly going out and assimilating those peoples and cultures. The Chinese did launch campaigns against nomadic raiders but they were retaliatory and served to act as a deterance rather than acts of conquest.
In fact is was the non-chinese peoples surrounding China that themselves took a active role in adopting and assimilating to Chinese culture as part of the imperial Chinese tribute system, offering gifts and regular tribute to the emperor and the emperor giving trading rights and concessions - though this was not seen by the Chinese as a equal diplomatic exchange rather an act of a benevolent ruler towards to a respectful but ultimately poor and unfortunate subordinate. And in turn various regions gradually came into the Chinese cultural and political sphere. The Chinese effectively applied ancient Rome's patron-client system in their foreign policy with the exception that their vassals where keen to learn and assimilate Chinese culture and benefit from access to Chinese goods and China seeing no need to interfere with their local politics.
The major conquests China did were on its own people living in China proper during the warring states period under its first emperor Qin Shi Huang Di but I never viewed that as 'conquest' or evidence of Chinese military imperialism and the peoples 'conquered' were Chinese and not foreigners. I view that as an act of unification rather than conquering foreign peoples much in the same way as ancient Greek city states warred amongst themselves and when Phillip of Macedon invaded southern Greece to unify the Hellenic peoples. I personally never believed Athens, Thebes, Corinth, Sparta etc. were foreigners to the Macedonians, they we're all Greeks speaking one language, using one writing system, sharing the same god's etc. the same is with China during her warring stars period, three kingdoms period etc.
Chinese imperialism differed from Rome. China favoured cultural imperialism i.e. an extreme form of 'soft power' displaying how well organized and prosperous your country is to others that they will want to develop closer ties to you in order to share in your prosperity - a political realization of Mencius work and to a lesser extent the Shang Shu or book of documents a religious/political chronicle come treatise which laid the foundation of Chinese political thought.
Rome favoured militaristic and political interference strategies when dealing with foreign peoples, invade and conquer (usually using the reasoning of self defense to justify preemptive strikes), individual politicians going on campaigns of conquest to garner political support back in Rome, establishing client states and installing or supporting cooperative puppet rulers. And their national mythology, the death and apparent ascension of Romulus whose last command to the people of Rome was to go and conquer the world is testament to the Roman imperialistic character.
I'm not as familiar with European geography as you are but the rivers and deserts you mentioned fundamentally aren't as formidable as huge mountain ranges or frozen wastes or long stretches of near desert like routes as China had. Throughout Roman history various tribes successfully invaded into and near to Roman territory and that had impacted Roman history such as Marian reforms which was used to recruit as many jobless plebeians to deal with an invasion in Gaul, or Caesar's campaigns in Gaul where he dealt with multiple invasion from Germanic tribes using the incursion as a pretext to conquer all of Gaul in order to 'protect' the gallic client kings of Rome. Towards the end of the empire the Rhine and various river crossings froze over to allow hundreds of thousands of Germanic and gothic people to invade the western part of the Roman empire.
Rivers are useful barriers but they're not insurmountable whether with organized boat crossings, bridge building or the rivers themselves freezing over. Deserts though Inhospitable are fundamentally open terrain and an army with proper provisions can cross over especially if water sources are not faroff as in the case of the parts of tigris and Euphrates running near the Syrian border. The Sassanids throughout their history launched various forays into eastern Roman territory but were never successful not owing to geography but mainly due to internal political intrigues which hampered campaigns or quick or the eventual Roman response to expel the Sassanids.
The silk road was born because of the Greco Bactrians/Indo greeks and china in ancient times. Greeks and Chinese/Indians is already have significant relationship since in ancient times....
Greco-Bactria dissolved one decade before the establishment of the Silk Road.
@@genovayork2468networks remained however
bet those steppe trade routes were terrifying
Merchants are looked down upon because
They move things and take a cut: it is not productive.
China thought Rome had it's own silk industry, because the cloth coming from the west was better quality, when in fact it was Chinese silk, in a very raw state, being respun. Things just don't change, why use QC on goods for the gwai-lo?
When is Skanderbeg part 2 coming?
never🤣
@@stri2003 its been a year💀
Best history channel there is .. but my guys could make series about Greece like you did for Rome .. from begging to end (i know Rome is still running) .. like from Minoans, Mycenaeans to Spartans and Greco-Persian wars to AlexanderTheGreat .. War Of Diadochi and finally conquest of Rome and and of Hellenic era 😊😅
New to this channel. As I looked through the videos I realize there’s an obsession with the Ottoman Empire but no videos on Assyrians , Armenians, Greeks, Kurds!
Got an issue?
The first reason is that the stories of those peoples are not nearly as interesting, epic, well-documented, and consequential as the Ottoman and Roman empire's. The second reason is that, well, the channel has garnered an audience with a peculiar love for Byzantine/Ottoman history.
@@lambert801 Byzantines were Greeks.
@@genovayork2468 True!
So that's why The Byzantines have the silk road in ck2
Fun fact: One of the byzantine empires greatest allies, was the axum empire. Alot of the trade from India came through them.
You forgot about Hazar Kaganat which was built just on trade between Byzantine and China? Why?
Because it didn't exist in the VIth century lmao.
@@genovayork2468 How about VI, VII, VIII centuries?
@@passerbyp8531 I already said it didn't exist in the VIth and the VIIth and VIIIth aren't the subject of the video.
@@genovayork2468 When Byzantine collapsed? Why VI, VII & VIII aren’t the subject? Trade between Byzantine & China then stoped?
@@passerbyp8531 Ask the youtuber.
11:01 yay
Byzantine Bro's unite
In grammatical ineptitude.
In stupidity.
04:17 That’s gotta be the Gok-Turks (Celestial, Eastern), not the Go-Turks. Would be a cool name nonetheless.
The video is very bad lmao.
@@Samuil-iq6eb I watched it till the end, and heard something about the Eastern Romans being an extension of Western Rome. Well…
My point about the Go-Turks still stands, tho.
Battle of Dumatul Jandal
By saying the Byzantine Empire was an extension of the Western Roman Empire, this channel failed to grasp even the most basic concepts
Thanks!
Hello! Thank you so much for your support! It helps us a lot🫡
the guy in the thumbnail looks like Quentin Tarantino
Which current country is closest to the core of Byzantine? I assume Greece?.
Also is it why it’s arch enemy is still Turkey whom their predecessors Ottoman and Seljuk’s toppled the Byzantine?.
Yes, and the capital of Greeks( Romei) was the Constantinople for 1000 years, and not Athens.
Greeks in Byzantine era/medieval times but also till modern times called themselves "Romei (Romans)".
💯
no sources?
More on trade routes please!
I really hate the term Byzantium. There are times stating it right. Romans as they saw themselves as Roman. Also, they had silk production in Rome, but what happened to it is lost. It isn't sure that if Chinese silk originally just was so much cheaper due to production rates that they stopped making their own which after the Chinese raised the prices rather gradually throughout time. It is like stated which was the trade was going on long before the west fell. The Eastern Roman Empire was very much Roman. It didn't lose its Roman status due to the city of Rome being lost. Both the West and East moved away from Rome for different reasons. It just is a bit annoying talking about Rome in the East as if they are not Roman in one sentence, but the next call it something it was never called.
ancient china alwis have internal war and and war with the outer tribes, when they need to raise funds for military they tax more , hence the items become more expensives, applied to merchants as well.
Byzantium is correct.
Think of it like calling America “Washington” or Russia “Moscow”, as news articles sometimes do. Referring to a country by the capital city
@@mint8648 No, Byzantium is the name of the country.
@@Samuil-iq6eb No
More roman content pls
Will do!
It's sad to think just how mankind would have evolved if not for the fall of both THE EASTERN & WESTERN ROMAN EMPIRES. THE FALL OF THESE GREAT EMPIRES LIKE GREECE AND ROME ARE SOME OF HISTORYS GREATEST TRAGEDIES. THE LOST KNOWLEDGE ALONE IS TERRIFIC.
Greece has existed only since 1830. And no, they were maleficient to development.
Keep deluding yourself.
@@genovayork2468The Modern Greece/Hellas existed since 1830.
Greece/Greek world/Greek history existed for about 5000 years.
@@mikel3359 *have existed
Greek world and history yes, Greece no.
@@genovayork2468 Bronze age Greece, Ancient Greece, Byzantium/Byzantine Empire = Medieval Greece, Modern Greece.
The words "Greeks, Greece" exists for about 2800 years, since the first contact between Greeks and Latins in Italian peninsula around 800-700 BC.
Would you describe Byzantium's political economy as basically mercantilism?
It was an Empire. Trade was its strong point but it wasn't its sole source of income like say the later trade republics. In fact, a major portion of its revenues simply came from land taxes.
@zippyparakeet1074 Sure, but we're talking political economy - the economic system. Land revenue is basically feudalism. At sea, the trade republics were still legally considered as subjects by the Christian emperors at least until 1204, and even later depending on the emperor. The question still stands. Beyond feudalism, can Byzantium's economic system be considered as basically mercantilism?
@@zippyparakeet1074 You have no idea on what planet you are.
1. You don't even know the difference between mercantilist and mercantile lmfao.😂😂
2. Not all the income of the so called trade republics came from trade.
@@AlexFeldman-of4rq Land revenue is feudalism??? What??? Do you know what feudalism means? The Byzantine administrative and economic system was literally the furthest thing from Feudalism. The small time farmers owned their lands unlike Western Europe where the nobility held large estates. The Byzantines simply made a buttload of money from taxes because they had a well preserved, well oiled, bureaucratic and administrative system that they inherited from the old Roman Empire.
Its merchant class was very strong and it definitely made a huge amount of money from trade but it was not the main source of the Empire's income. Yes, they made that much money.
No it wasn’t mercantilist. It was run by bureaucratically appointed military governors
The Byzantine empire was not Roman. It's usually Roman fanboys who like to think that is. It was basically a Greek kingdom. Greeks who inherited the eastern half of the Roman empire.
Agreed. Too many distinct differences to say that one was the continuation of the other.
Roman observers of the time clearly noted a difference between Latin West and Greek East
Greek detected
@@Ghostrex101 It was like 85% Roman, 10% Persian and 5% greek
@@ItalMiser117 Bullshit from your ass
Silk Road’s many ways contained in Turkic Khanate
There isn't a "Byzantine Empire" only Roman Empire, even the people living in it called it the Roman Empire, Rome never fell only the Western half did, or you can say they lost the western half to the Germanic tribes.
Byzantium is correct.
Byzantium is correct.
right and the Holy Roman Empire was actually Holy and Roman and an Empire
Western Wei was founded in 534, Northern Qi in 550 and Southern Chen in 557, your map is wrong like holy.
Your silk route map is also very wrong.
There were no Russians then.
You failed to do basic research.
🕋
🤮
@@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UK You're crazy.
@@Samuil-iq6eb
Says the one following a clearly violent hate-based religion
We went to know how the western roman empire colleps😊😊
Hi . Long time fan. Is it true that Jews basically had a monopoly on animal skin, and animal hides in Byzantine empire
Well, except hogs
@@Cjnw true but then no Christian tanner can claim they were stealing his business
Why do we call the Eastern Roman Empire the Byzantine Empire? Shouldn't we just call it the Roman Empire?
It's a distinction later made by people outside the empire since it no longer controlled Rome. Plus other states ( like the HRE among others) claimed to be the true successors of Rome.
@@lordInquisitor The HRE wasn't a state and it didn't claim successorship, but equivalence.
@@genovayork2468 " wasn't a state" I'm fully aware that it was a disunited mess . When I said state I never implied that it was as coherent as our modern idea of one bit apparently being pedantic is in fashion.
@@lordInquisitor What part of "It wasn't a state" don't you get? Apparently being weak on the brain is in fashion.
@@genovayork2468 dude, don't be rude. If it doesn't gain you anything dont bother. More over how was it not a state/nation?
Until the arrival of the Seljuk Turks everything went quite for the Eastern Romans!
You know no history.
Byzantine dark ages be like
@@Samuil-iq6eb Mmmm, poor judgement...
@@mint8648 Not bad for an Empire that lasted a 1,000 years...
@@explorer1968 No.
The greatest rump ever
Nah, the Mughal Empire is better.
Nope. Mughalia, Bulgaria, Khazaria, Kara Khanidia, Ottomania, Gupta and many more were greater.
Short answer. Putin. Let me explain by rewriting history.
❤
No mention of the Islamic expansion and how that effected the market?
It cut off byzantine trade with india
@@mint8648 It cut direct trade, not all trade.
monumentous?
Its amazing that before America existed, China had the richest and best economy in the world.
Why is there always so much hype around Roman-Chinese Trade and Relations when by far the biggest Trade partner of Rome was India.
India = Brahma
China = Vishnu
Russia = Shiva
True
India wasn't a country before 1947.
India wasn't a state before 1947.
They’re closer than Rome anyway so might as well. 😂
There were no Russians during Justinian reign wtf!?!
gotta move on from the term Byzantine. Once the western Roman half of the empire collapsed...the eastern half became the sole ROMAN EMPIRE until 1453. The Holy Roman Empire was a pretender state. Period
Byzantium is correct.
Turkish war of indepedence part 2 ??
Indepedence from whom? The Ottoman turks?🤣🤣
Freedom for Palestine and Gaza 🇵🇸 ❤❤
No thanks
Nobody cares
@@Imperialmonarchist Take yourself somewhere else. "Monarch" lmao.
Babe how often do you think about the 'Eastern' Roman Empire!? Lol
Actually the western Roman empire was the extension of eastern Roman empire.Just take a look at Julian.He became emperor in west but when his uncle died and united the empire he ruled in Constantinople.I don't get why you people dend to confuse it,the empire's capital after Constantine is Constantinople,even after the last administrative division the capital of both empires is in Constantinople,Ravenna is just the seat of the western emperor and Rome is the prestigious monument of this creation and seat of the western Senate,because obviously Ravenna hadn't the structures of Rome to house the offices of the senate and its body also,in contrast to Rome that was the previous capital and Constantinople that was the later capital,and as the Pope said many many years ago,"when the two Romes were united,ruled the worled" he didn't say three including Ravenna.So there are two capitals Rome the previous and Constantinople the later and the Eastern Empire is now the center,so the west is the extension.
When greece was an empire!!!
No such thing as Greece.
@@Samuil-iq6eb the official language was greek, universally Byzantine empire is known as a greek empire
Technically
@@konstadinoskontos4237 Byzantium!=Greece.
@@genovayork2468 yep thank you!!!, also ancient greeks created the city of Byzantium later Constantinople
if the Romans did not smuggle silkworms from the Great Tang, will the Justinian plague still happened?
Isn't this epidemic from Egypt, according to the Romans?
You are parallel with history, the Tang began in 618.
Its name is Eastern Roman Empire, not Byzantine. That's a modern name they gave to it.
Which is correct. Unless you call China Zhongguó, Greco-Bactria Balhó and Germany Deutschland.
@@genovayork2468 Never said its not correct. It's just funny having a map that sais Western Roman Emoire and Byzantine Empire. Because the map should include the Eastern part of the Empire as well no?
@@genovayork2468 plus it could be offensive to the memory of the Eastern Roman Empire as the whole idea that the Eastern Roman Empire wasn't Roman was force by the Pope later on because of the split of the churches and because The Eastern Roman Empire Keverne recognised the Holy Roman Empire as a Roman Empire.
@@mrawesome1688 You said its name isn't Byzantium, that means you said it's incorrect, weak on the brain. I don't care if it's offensive, I care if it's correct, and it is.
@@genovayork2468 well that is true no one back then call it Byzantium. Everyone call it it Eastern Roman Empire. Maybe your mind is weak for not caring. That just shows lack of interest and that maybe you shouldn't have an opinion in matters you lack interest.
Fuk Othoman Empire. Hail Constantinopolis
Nobody cares about your Greek propaganda.
Least nationalist Greek
😂blame crusades not ottomans since crusades are the ones who put empire in coma, then ottomans just plug off
@@e.v3832 The empire put itself in coma. If it had been strong it would've resisted with no effort.
@@Samuil-iq6eb you sound like someone who is an expert in comas 😂😂😜😜😜
The Byzantine empire wasn't an extension of the Western Roman Empire lmao, they were both the successors of Rome.
They WERE Rome
@@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UK No.
@@genovayork2468
Yes
@@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UK No. There's a difference between Rome and East Rome, it's in the name.
@@genovayork2468
But that’s not their name. They just called themselves Rome.
Fun Fact: Byzantine Empire never existed.
After 476 it was called Roman Empire and lasted until 1453.
Nope. Also you're very bad at history, the western empire ended in 480.
@@Samuil-iq6eb "The deposition of Emperor Romulus Augustulus in 476 AD is the most commonly cited end date for the Western Roman Empire."
@@dantetre Yes. Thanks for showing your weak brain.
@@dantetreRomolus Augustulus is Usurper put in the position by his Traitor Father Orestes Also under the Roman Imperial Law a Western Emperor Counter-Part must be Recognized by its Senior Eastern Counterpart in Constantinople.
Roma Invicta
2nd 🥈
Normie
"Surviving extension of the Western Roman Empire" Delete your channel lmao
Trump: jai na!😊
Very badly written. Or is this channel meant for children?