Gotta love Anastasius, he’s by far one of the most underrated Emperors in Byzantine history. Didn’t start shit, specifically rooted for the reds so that neither the blues nor greens would get pissed at him, and he basically spent most of his reign saving up cash in the treasury
@@mrscoldarrowI think the blues and greens actually revolted at one point and Anastasius basically said "FINE! Find me ONE person that can do a better job than me and I'll abdicate right here and now!" They paused and ended the revolt. What a chad😂
I like to think the long reigns of the Byzantine emperors demonstrate the fundamental change from the classical Roman Empire- that as a geopolitical entity, the medieval empire was far more autocratic than the principate or even dominate, but that it was also a much more stable entity. The days of first citizens getting assassinated after a 12 week rule were replaced by decades long reigns of the Autocrat of Rome.
Danger of being assasinated was still pretty large and many Emperors ended like that.Even Basil II despite he eventually maaged to keep himself in power for so long could have been violantly replaced by others many times during his life.
It also helps that the Empire's size is much smaller, meaning that there are less chances of some random governor getting proclaimed emperor in some province
It's just the size that changed once aurelian formed the empire despotic control was created and maintained up to the fall of the Eastern Roman empire.
Basil II's "brutality" towards the Bulgarians was quite likely invented in the 11th century following the revolt of Constantine Bodin. It was supposed to serve as a deterrent against other revolts. And it did. I find it kind of obnoxious how our historiography still regurgitates the same stuff over and over again.
I'm aware of this, actually, which is why I didn't mention it. I always assumed Bulgarians hated Basil II over the fact he defeated them, not due to some convenient invention about his treatment of Bulgarians. Sort of like how we Portuguese see Philip II of Spain. He was a good king, sure, but we still don't like him regardless.
@@spectrum1140 Bulgarians don't hate Basil II in particular since Bulgaria was already declining by the time he conquered it. The Byzantines in general are not viewed with the same hatred as the Ottomans or even the Serbians after 1885.
I am wondering what is Basil’s reputation there, I.E, how much is he disliked, considering it’s been a thousand years, and I imagine it would be better than some of the Ottoman Sultans
I'm not sure my friend on what are you basing the fact tha blindings of Bulgarians didn't happen at KIeidon, but adter Constantine Bodin's revolt in 1072, but to me that argument does not make sense. Yes, our primary source for this event is John Skylitzes who wrote after the Bodin's uprising and maybe exaggerate the numbers, but I find two flaws with this reasoning. First Constantine Bodin was a Serb and his uprising had more of an pan-South Slavic tone to it, than it did Bulgarian one, thus victimizing only Bulgarians would not really have to effect here. Second, if there was such a thing as blinding of some 14 to 15.000 men, I think that people would well know about it just 58 years later and thus the need to create some fictional horror story on a language that Bulgarians cannot even understand and using that as some sort of deterrent simply doesn't make any sense. Bulgarians surely would've very well known about this story if it is true and if John invented it, why should they believe it? Third and most important thing is that we actually have the confirmation of this event from another source: Kekaumenos. True, he only mentions that some 14.000 were captured and nothing about blinding. But what sets him apart from Skylitzes is that Kekaumenos probably wrote his work that describes this event before Bodin's revolt in 1072, this without reason for fabricating it. Skylitzes actually got this story directly from him, so it is possible that Kekaumenos mentioned the fate (blinding) of Bulgarian soldiers, but that that part of his work is lost to history.
Too bad basil didn’t want kids or to marry away a niece or two it would’ve helped or prolong maybe a great leader would’ve been created down the line but hey 50 years rule is great I guess
Aelia pulcheria has got to be the best "Big sister" in roman history, she essential was her brother's regent at 16/17 years old and even when he died ensured there was a peaceful transition of power to Marcian.
Honestly if anything Bulgarians should respect Basil II, it took one of the best emperors of the Byzantines to deal with the threat of the First Bulgarian Empire. Plus, as someone married to a Bulgarian the only time my wife brings up atrocities committed against the Bulgarians it's to do with the Ottomans, and Nikephoros I - who by all means got what was coming to him in the form of Khan Krum. Great video, though, love your content Dom Spectrum!
hey, just one thing that would make this a bit better and more informative, when you introduce the emperors name and the length of their reign, it would be nice if you also listened the years they were in power, like 830-854 or whatever
3:44 If you read the text on the right, you can read "Konstantinos" (Constantine in greek), while the other text on the left is "Iostinianos" (Justinian in greek) and this emperor is holding Hagia Sophia, so Justinian is on the left not on the right
If only Khosrow II had not declared that war. Perhaps Rome and her Emperors would still be around today. But alas, here we all are. Trapped in this Romansless world, with barbarian rulers......
@@historydude6022 not really, I mean Rome was a country too. It was both Greek and Italian, Italy is the successor to rome like China to the old dynasties. Byzantines have Greece and would have Anatolia too had the Turks not betrayed them at Manzikert
He was such a chad that he realized there was no point in trying to defend the city of Rome. He never tried to take it back from the Pope even though he asked to have it returned.
Isn't Constantine VIII the longest ruling emperor of the Byzantine empire? Yes he was useless and overshadowed by his legendary brother but he was co-emperor nonetheless, and reigned from 976 to 1028
Co-Emperors are traditionally not counted, often even by contemporary historians. It was more of a symbolic title for the heir to the senior Emperor, aka the real Emperor (usually; Basil I and Tiberius II were briefly junior emperors who held the real power). Basil II: co-emperor 960-76, senior emperor 976-1025. Constantine VIII: co-emperor 962-1025, senior emperor 1025-28.
In todays episode of everyone hates the Byzantines, watch this once mighty empire crumble to dust fighting on every front imaginable -Total war Medievel 2
Could you make a video about which emperors were best at the different parts of being the emperor? Like the best general, best diplomat, best at infrastructure et cetera?
Huh, that's actually a pretty interesting idea. Right now, I'm completely focused on other stuff, and I'm not making promises on my future content, but that is a suggestion I'l keep in mind.
I know this is out of your usual scope but how about kings of norway They are looked over for denmark and sweden but they had some good ones before kalmar.
I love the moxie of someone who would post this video on YT, assuming that any significant number of viewers knows 1. What The Eastern Roman Empire was, 2. Where it was, 3. When it was, and 4. That it had Emperors in the first place, let alone how long some of them ruled.
Sainy Basil II did also defeated turks . you can see the map how the empire recovered land in the easter part too it wasn´t only against bulgarians but he was also a turkish slayer
@@heldkiller it was only called the Byzantine Empire by the west not because of greek similaritys but because western historians at that time wanted the Holy roman Empire to be considered the inharitor of Rome and they wanted to deny that the Eastern Roman empire was the continuance of of the Roman Empire.
Andronikos ii also pulled a Constantine IX by killing his most competent general,dismantle the Byzantine navy and invited the spanish to Byzantine territory,which then cause even more problem
@@mysteryjunkie9808 Given that he did it to Traitorous Romans, Armenians, Georgians, Fatimids etc too, as it was the Byzantine standard for punishment that’s less harsh then death.....I’d say fairly kind yes. You seem to intentionally forget half of Bulgaria peacefully surrendered to him in 1018, and those who did were all rewarded and given titles in the Empire. The Bulgarians were Allowed to keep an Archbishop, pay taxes in barter instead of coin, afforded equal status under Byzantine law and given lands if they joined the Military. Basil’s conquest is flatout one of the most generous and least cruel annexations in all of History.
Mostly because he was never called the bulgar slayer in his life time, and many of the more famous bulgar slaying stories are likely complete fabrications.
How about a video about other, minor Roman/Byzantine successor states? Like the Empire of Nicaea (Who restored the Eastern Empire in 1261), Empire of Trebizond, Despotate of Epirus, Kingdom/Empire of Thessalonica (Technically a crusader state but claimed to be a Roman successor). Not even just their emperors, but about them in general.
6:02 we see a whole lot of these drawings of greek-roman emperors and they all look terrible in them. everyone always looks so damn old and tired. just google any other drawing of any emperor, they all have huge bags under their eyes too, constantine XI is one of a hundred more examples. the emperors we normally think are actually old and tired by the end of their reigns, Heraclius and Basil the Based, always look good in their images and drawings and mosiacs
The Eastern Orthodox Church was very much against glorious images of Emperors fearing people would worship them like in previous times when people worshipped statues of Roman Emperor’s that’s why there’s such a decline in much art work or more realistic I should say
Not particularly they just lived in different circumstances in an empire that had multiple fronts and had to balance powerful neighbours. They were at their best about as competent as the Romans just lacked the full spectrum dominance that allowed then to fight multiple front wars. 1 vs 1 they could take on any state when in good form. The best byzantine emperor's are easily as competent as their roman counterparts
I really hate the term "byzantine empire". It's the eastern roman empire, and I don't like that people try to distinguish them from the Romans. They never saw themselves as not rome, and I don't get why we should act like it's a separate entity.
Roman and Greek art really took a hit after Christianity took a hold. Those paintings literally look like preschool art projects. . It's so sad what religion did to the arts for over 1500 years.
you trully have no idea what are you talking about. if you want to talk about byzantine christian art, look all those glorious images of saints, Jesus and His Holy Mother. If we stay to images that is, because architecture is art too. Look at Hagia Sophia or all those glorious Orthodox Temples etc. The sandards were different but that doesnt mean the art that followed was worse. And of course i dont mention other art forms like mosaics, liturgical music etc.
@@PELLIOTIS The Art turned to Crap. Stop defending what looks like preschool art with no depth, lighting,. Or anything that makes paintings look skillful. After the collapse of Rome, art took a major fall in quality throughout the middle ages until they rediscovered Greco Roman artistic styles.
Anastasius is the most impressive since he became at 61 and rule for 26 years
Anastatius was a G
If only he wasn’t a Miaphysite lol.
Gotta love Anastasius, he’s by far one of the most underrated Emperors in Byzantine history. Didn’t start shit, specifically rooted for the reds so that neither the blues nor greens would get pissed at him, and he basically spent most of his reign saving up cash in the treasury
@@mrscoldarrow Ultimate Centrist in the Chariots.
@@mrscoldarrowI think the blues and greens actually revolted at one point and Anastasius basically said "FINE! Find me ONE person that can do a better job than me and I'll abdicate right here and now!" They paused and ended the revolt. What a chad😂
I like to think the long reigns of the Byzantine emperors demonstrate the fundamental change from the classical Roman Empire- that as a geopolitical entity, the medieval empire was far more autocratic than the principate or even dominate, but that it was also a much more stable entity. The days of first citizens getting assassinated after a 12 week rule were replaced by decades long reigns of the Autocrat of Rome.
Ironically, those more autocratic emperor have weaker power (not talking about byzantine btw, just europe in general).
Danger of being assasinated was still pretty large and many Emperors ended like that.Even Basil II despite he eventually maaged to keep himself in power for so long could have been violantly replaced by others many times during his life.
It also helps that the Empire's size is much smaller, meaning that there are less chances of some random governor getting proclaimed emperor in some province
It's just the size that changed once aurelian formed the empire despotic control was created and maintained up to the fall of the Eastern Roman empire.
Ahm 20 years anarchy ahm
"Bad dudes doing bad things" -Aristotle, commenting on the Normans
The normans didn't even exist at that point. They would just be known as barbarians
Basil II's "brutality" towards the Bulgarians was quite likely invented in the 11th century following the revolt of Constantine Bodin. It was supposed to serve as a deterrent against other revolts. And it did. I find it kind of obnoxious how our historiography still regurgitates the same stuff over and over again.
I'm aware of this, actually, which is why I didn't mention it. I always assumed Bulgarians hated Basil II over the fact he defeated them, not due to some convenient invention about his treatment of Bulgarians. Sort of like how we Portuguese see Philip II of Spain. He was a good king, sure, but we still don't like him regardless.
@@spectrum1140 dutch people also do not like Philip II, even though he was a good king
@@spectrum1140 Bulgarians don't hate Basil II in particular since Bulgaria was already declining by the time he conquered it. The Byzantines in general are not viewed with the same hatred as the Ottomans or even the Serbians after 1885.
I am wondering what is Basil’s reputation there, I.E, how much is he disliked, considering it’s been a thousand years, and I imagine it would be better than some of the Ottoman Sultans
I'm not sure my friend on what are you basing the fact tha blindings of Bulgarians didn't happen at KIeidon, but adter Constantine Bodin's revolt in 1072, but to me that argument does not make sense. Yes, our primary source for this event is John Skylitzes who wrote after the Bodin's uprising and maybe exaggerate the numbers, but I find two flaws with this reasoning. First Constantine Bodin was a Serb and his uprising had more of an pan-South Slavic tone to it, than it did Bulgarian one, thus victimizing only Bulgarians would not really have to effect here. Second, if there was such a thing as blinding of some 14 to 15.000 men, I think that people would well know about it just 58 years later and thus the need to create some fictional horror story on a language that Bulgarians cannot even understand and using that as some sort of deterrent simply doesn't make any sense. Bulgarians surely would've very well known about this story if it is true and if John invented it, why should they believe it? Third and most important thing is that we actually have the confirmation of this event from another source: Kekaumenos. True, he only mentions that some 14.000 were captured and nothing about blinding. But what sets him apart from Skylitzes is that Kekaumenos probably wrote his work that describes this event before Bodin's revolt in 1072, this without reason for fabricating it. Skylitzes actually got this story directly from him, so it is possible that Kekaumenos mentioned the fate (blinding) of Bulgarian soldiers, but that that part of his work is lost to history.
Finally, more love for my dude Basil II.
Basil the Based
Reported
@@user-cb4fu3wo2d lol cope Bulgarian
@@user-cb4fu3wo2d Barbarians can't accept the beauty of Rome. That's just how it is.
Based
Too bad basil didn’t want kids or to marry away a niece or two it would’ve helped or prolong maybe a great leader would’ve been created down the line but hey 50 years rule is great I guess
Problems with with good rulers, too busy about the nation but not sexual life.
@@NeoWish yeah. That's a a tragedy
Have no kids? Fine. Keeping your nieces from getting married? Just not smart. That was one of Basil II's few flaws.
Interesting how the longest reigning Roman Emperor and the longest reigning Byzantine Emperor were both ranked as the best emperor.
Aelia pulcheria has got to be the best "Big sister" in roman history, she essential was her brother's regent at 16/17 years old and even when he died ensured there was a peaceful transition of power to Marcian.
Honestly if anything Bulgarians should respect Basil II, it took one of the best emperors of the Byzantines to deal with the threat of the First Bulgarian Empire.
Plus, as someone married to a Bulgarian the only time my wife brings up atrocities committed against the Bulgarians it's to do with the Ottomans, and Nikephoros I - who by all means got what was coming to him in the form of Khan Krum.
Great video, though, love your content Dom Spectrum!
hey, just one thing that would make this a bit better and more informative, when you introduce the emperors name and the length of their reign, it would be nice if you also listened the years they were in power, like 830-854 or whatever
Funny how long Byzantine emperors can rule with no murderous praetorian guard in their backyard :))))
I like Basil II, he is pretty cool :)
3:44 If you read the text on the right, you can read "Konstantinos" (Constantine in greek), while the other text on the left is "Iostinianos" (Justinian in greek) and this emperor is holding Hagia Sophia, so Justinian is on the left not on the right
If only Khosrow II had not declared that war. Perhaps Rome and her Emperors would still be around today. But alas, here we all are. Trapped in this Romansless world, with barbarian rulers......
If only Phocas hadn’t overthrown Maurice
Lmao no, Rome was doomed from the get go
@@marcuscarcus159 it was really. It would be far fetched to see some for of Rome of Byzantine empire to survive to modern day like China
@@historydude6022 not really, I mean Rome was a country too. It was both Greek and Italian, Italy is the successor to rome like China to the old dynasties. Byzantines have Greece and would have Anatolia too had the Turks not betrayed them at Manzikert
Reee.
Us barbarians are doing fine ;_;
actually alexios uncle issac was the first kommenos
Another great vid. Love the Byzantine spotlight!
You'd think videos like this would get stale, but I'm here every upload lol. Hopefully the english monarch ranking comes out before Liz bites it
loving the roman and byzantine content
Thanks for this great video...
Can u please do a video on top 10 roman and then after byzantine generals including military emperors??
All HRE emperors ranked video? Great vid btw.
Alexios was not actually the founder of the Kommenian Dynasty, Isaac I Komnenos
was the founder however.
Fun fact: Constantine V was inmortalized with the nickname "Shit-named" (Copronimus) by iconodules historians... That must be embarrasing
Shame because the man was a Chad by all accounts.
He was such a chad that he realized there was no point in trying to defend the city of Rome. He never tried to take it back from the Pope even though he asked to have it returned.
Small mistake, at 1:47 you say 34 years but the visuals say 37.
Isn't Constantine VIII the longest ruling emperor of the Byzantine empire? Yes he was useless and overshadowed by his legendary brother but he was co-emperor nonetheless, and reigned from 976 to 1028
Co-Emperors are traditionally not counted, often even by contemporary historians. It was more of a symbolic title for the heir to the senior Emperor, aka the real Emperor (usually; Basil I and Tiberius II were briefly junior emperors who held the real power).
Basil II: co-emperor 960-76, senior emperor 976-1025.
Constantine VIII: co-emperor 962-1025, senior emperor 1025-28.
oh my god hes posted
In todays episode of everyone hates the Byzantines, watch this once mighty empire crumble to dust fighting on every front imaginable
-Total war Medievel 2
I'm kind of miffed that Basil II missed his chance to rule for 50 years by less than a month.
Andronikos the Second is the Honorius of the Byzantines Empire.
Will you ever do a ranking all the popes?
Probably not.
Could you make a video about which emperors were best at the different parts of being the emperor? Like the best general, best diplomat, best at infrastructure et cetera?
Huh, that's actually a pretty interesting idea. Right now, I'm completely focused on other stuff, and I'm not making promises on my future content, but that is a suggestion I'l keep in mind.
@@spectrum1140 How good was I and Theodora at controlling the plague?
Nice
I know this is out of your usual scope but how about kings of norway They are looked over for denmark and sweden but they had some good ones before kalmar.
can you make a worst Byzantine Emperors video?
can you rank the ottoman sultans?
I love the moxie of someone who would post this video on YT, assuming that any significant number of viewers knows 1. What The Eastern Roman Empire was, 2. Where it was, 3. When it was, and 4. That it had Emperors in the first place, let alone how long some of them ruled.
What's ur point exactly
@@slow_ae2676 This is YT, since when does anyone need a “point?”
The artwork looked like The Land of Make Believe (Mister Rogers)
Maybe do one on Egyptian Nswts (Pharaohs)
could you somehow include the date, that the terms took place?
Bulgar slayer or Bvlgaricvs
Is a very normal title for someone to have
Similarly: Germanicus, Gothicus, Turkicus, Parthicus...
Sainy Basil II did also defeated turks . you can see the map how the empire recovered land in the easter part too it wasn´t only against bulgarians but he was also a turkish slayer
Please do italian kings from worst to best
You mean ranking all of the popes
You made a minor mistake on number 8. The text reads 37 years while you said 34 years.
To bad the byzantines didn’t last longer
Yes.
i mean the empire lasted a 1000 years, thats pretty long
Ναι😔
Longer than the Western Romans for sure
do 10 best roman emperors by military skill
The Bulgar Slayer sounds like something straight out of a D&D world 😂
Didn't Theodosius II rule for 48 years, 6 months, 19 days?
do one on denmark
Dont you mean Eastern Roman Emperors?
It was known as the Byzantine Empire since it had Greek similarities
@@heldkiller it was only called the Byzantine Empire by the west not because of greek similaritys but because western historians at that time wanted the Holy roman Empire to be considered the inharitor of Rome and they wanted to deny that the Eastern Roman empire was the continuance of of the Roman Empire.
@@devincanada9523 Right but I knew the Byzantines referred themselves as Romans.
Andronikos ii also pulled a Constantine IX by killing his most competent general,dismantle the Byzantine navy and invited the spanish to Byzantine territory,which then cause even more problem
Make video about bulgarian kings
Now do rankings of the Popes. Yes. All of them. No antipopes to be fair :p
Wow, the Byzantines dominated this list.
no french frie on bottom :(
nice im the 1000 like
all kings of england with anglo saxons kings to0
The entire iconoclaust controversy can be summed up by the meme Calm down son its just a drawing
Despite his name Basil the Bulgar slayer was rather kind to his conquered Bulgarian people in order to stop a revolt
Blinding them is very kind
@@mysteryjunkie9808 Given that he did it to Traitorous Romans, Armenians, Georgians, Fatimids etc too, as it was the Byzantine standard for punishment that’s less harsh then death.....I’d say fairly kind yes.
You seem to intentionally forget half of Bulgaria peacefully surrendered to him in 1018, and those who did were all rewarded and given titles in the Empire. The Bulgarians were Allowed to keep an Archbishop, pay taxes in barter instead of coin, afforded equal status under Byzantine law and given lands if they joined the Military.
Basil’s conquest is flatout one of the most generous and least cruel annexations in all of History.
@@mysteryjunkie9808 Dude it's the medieval era what did you expect? Some compassion? Nah.
Mostly because he was never called the bulgar slayer in his life time, and many of the more famous bulgar slaying stories are likely complete fabrications.
Basil the based
How about a video about other, minor Roman/Byzantine successor states? Like the Empire of Nicaea (Who restored the Eastern Empire in 1261), Empire of Trebizond, Despotate of Epirus, Kingdom/Empire of Thessalonica (Technically a crusader state but claimed to be a Roman successor). Not even just their emperors, but about them in general.
Byzantine emperors are orthodox christian monarchs ruling from Constantinople
@@sabaurushadze1639 What does that have to do with my comment?
Rank every British monarch
No such thing as Byzantine emperors. They were Eastern Roman Emperors.
LONG LIVE WEED
Hello :)
I am surprised that some Byzantine Emperors ruled that long considering all the civil wars and coups in Eastern Roman history.
6:02 we see a whole lot of these drawings of greek-roman emperors and they all look terrible in them. everyone always looks so damn old and tired. just google any other drawing of any emperor, they all have huge bags under their eyes too, constantine XI is one of a hundred more examples. the emperors we normally think are actually old and tired by the end of their reigns, Heraclius and Basil the Based, always look good in their images and drawings and mosiacs
The Eastern Orthodox Church was very much against glorious images of Emperors fearing people would worship them like in previous times when people worshipped statues of Roman Emperor’s that’s why there’s such a decline in much art work or more realistic I should say
Well, I was tired from retaking Italia and Africa, than the next emperor lost a lot of it.
Eastern Roman Emperors*
Do you think that the Greek rulers of the Roman Empire were lesser and more incompetent than the former Latin ones?
Not particularly they just lived in different circumstances in an empire that had multiple fronts and had to balance powerful neighbours. They were at their best about as competent as the Romans just lacked the full spectrum dominance that allowed then to fight multiple front wars. 1 vs 1 they could take on any state when in good form. The best byzantine emperor's are easily as competent as their roman counterparts
I really hate the term "byzantine empire". It's the eastern roman empire, and I don't like that people try to distinguish them from the Romans. They never saw themselves as not rome, and I don't get why we should act like it's a separate entity.
2 spectrum posts in a week? 🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪
Roman and Greek art really took a hit after Christianity took a hold. Those paintings literally look like preschool art projects. .
It's so sad what religion did to the arts for over 1500 years.
you trully have no idea what are you talking about. if you want to talk about byzantine christian art, look all those glorious images of saints, Jesus and His Holy Mother. If we stay to images that is, because architecture is art too. Look at Hagia Sophia or all those glorious Orthodox Temples etc. The sandards were different but that doesnt mean the art that followed was worse. And of course i dont mention other art forms like mosaics, liturgical music etc.
@@PELLIOTIS The Art turned to Crap. Stop defending what looks like preschool art with no depth, lighting,. Or anything that makes paintings look skillful. After the collapse of Rome, art took a major fall in quality throughout the middle ages until they rediscovered Greco Roman artistic styles.
@@masstv9052 You have clearly no idea what are you talking about... kek
@@PELLIOTIS What modern perceptions of history and a complete lack of understanding of art does to a MF: